DP7

DecisionPoint
http://proethica.org/ontology/cases#DecisionPoint

DP7

After refusing the arms storage certification, should Engineer A limit the response to the immediate refusal and referral of a qualified expert, or must Engineer A also proactively escalate the role-competence mismatch to supervisory authority and advocate for institutional remediation of the structural conditions that created the gap?

Having refused or anticipating refusal of the arms storage certification, Engineer A must determine what affirmative post-refusal obligations arise — including whether to proactively disclose the competence gap before a formal request arrives, escalate to supervisory authority, formally document the refusal, identify and refer a qualified expert, and advocate for institutional changes such as securing training funds or modifying the role structure.

After refusing, formally document the refusal and its competence basis in writing, escalate the matter to higher supervisory authority, identify and refer a qualified expert in Army physical security and explosives regulations, and formally communicate to supervisors that the Army's withholding of training funds is a direct causal factor in the competence gap — framing the issue as a systemic organizational failure requiring institutional remediation.

Limit the response to declining the certification and identifying a qualified expert who can properly perform it, treating the referral as fully discharging Engineer A's ethical responsibilities without further escalation, formal documentation, or institutional advocacy — on the basis that the engineer's duty is to avoid personal ethical violation and that systemic remediation is the organization's responsibility, not the individual engineer's.

Treat the competence obligation as continuous rather than reactive by proactively disclosing the competence gap to the Army official and relevant supervisors before any formal certification request arrives — allowing the institution to arrange for a qualified expert in advance — and then, if the request is made anyway, refuse and escalate through the graduated BER 94-8 model, but without personally advocating for training fund restoration or role restructuring beyond what is necessary to address the immediate safety gap.

Engineer A