DP4

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

DP4

Is Engineer A obligated to report out-of-discipline safety code violations to public authorities notwithstanding a client confidentiality agreement, and does a brief mention of those violations in a confidential client report satisfy the public safety reporting duty?

In the BER 89-7 precedent scenario, Engineer A is a structural engineer retained under a confidentiality agreement who learns from the client of electrical and mechanical code violations in the building — violations outside his engineering specialty — that could cause injury to building occupants. Engineer A must decide whether to report these out-of-discipline safety hazards to the appropriate public authorities, and whether a brief mention of the violations in his confidential structural report satisfies that obligation.

Notify the appropriate regulatory or enforcement authority — not merely the client — of the electrical and mechanical code violations that could cause injury to building occupants, recognizing that the paramount obligation to protect public health and safety supersedes the contractual confidentiality agreement and is not limited to Engineer A's structural engineering specialty.

Include a brief reference to the electrical and mechanical code violations in the confidential structural report delivered to the client, treating this mention as sufficient discharge of the safety reporting obligation without separately notifying public authorities who have enforcement jurisdiction over the hazards.

Decline to report the out-of-discipline code violations to any party beyond the client, on the grounds that the confidentiality agreement bars disclosure and that the violations fall outside Engineer A's structural engineering specialty, treating the contractual obligation as superseding the public safety reporting duty.

Engineer A — Structural Engineer Operating Under Confidentiality Agreement (BER 89-7)