DP5

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

DP5

XYZ Engineering — through Supervisor B's unauthorized alteration and transmission of Engineer A's sealed reports — has engaged in fraudulent conduct that harmed identifiable third parties. Engineer A is obligated to disengage from professional association with the firm under NSPE Code II.1.d, but fulfilling his corrective obligations may require continued access to firm records. How should Engineer A sequence disengagement relative to his corrective and reporting duties, and does immediate resignation without prior corrective action constitute a sufficient ethical response?

Engineer A's obligation to disengage from professional association with XYZ Engineering upon discovering that the firm has committed fraud using his sealed documents, and the sequencing of that disengagement relative to corrective obligations

Before or concurrent with resignation, document and preserve all evidence of original reports and alterations, formally notify XYZ Engineering in writing that altered reports must be corrected or withdrawn, report to the state licensing board and enforcement authorities, and directly notify affected property owners — then disengage from employment without undue delay

Immediately resign from XYZ Engineering upon confirming the alteration and fraudulent submission, and fulfill all corrective and reporting obligations — licensing board notification, enforcement authority contact, and property owner notification — as an independent professional after departure, without relying on continued access to firm records

Remain employed at XYZ Engineering long enough to conduct a thorough internal investigation, secure complete copies of all altered and original reports, and attempt to compel internal correction through senior leadership or legal counsel — resigning and reporting to external authorities only after internal corrective channels have been exhausted or have demonstrably failed

Engineer A