Prudential Disclosure Invoked in BER 97-11 Discussion
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/146#Prudential_Disclosure_Invoked_in_BER_97-11_Discussion
Properties
Instance of
PrudentialDisclosureasRelationalSelf-Protection
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#PrudentialDisclosureasRelationalSelf-Protection
Applied to
Engineer A's decision not to proactively share background information about the pending ethics complaint with Client B
Balancing with
Allegation-Adjudication Distinction in Disclosure Obligation
Personal Privacy Right in Professional Self-Disclosure
Concrete expression
The Board noted that while Engineer A was not ethically obligated to disclose the pending complaint, Engineer A should have weighed providing Client B with limited background information in a dispassionate manner — doing so would have demonstrated professional responsibility and given Client B early notice to respond to third-party questions
Confidence
0.92
Importance
medium
Interpretation
Even when disclosure is not ethically required, voluntary provision of limited contextual information preserves the relational trust between engineer and client and positions the engineer as transparent and professional
Invoked by
Board of Ethical Review (BER 97-11)
Tension resolution
Prudential disclosure is framed as advisable but not obligatory — the engineer retains discretion, but the prudent choice favors proactive limited disclosure to protect the professional relationship
Source Evidence
Source text
This action would demonstrate to Client B that Engineer A was acting in a professional and responsible manner and had nothing to hide or fear concerning the complaint.
Text references
By providing Client B with some limited background information, Engineer A would be providing Client B with early notice of the pending matter so that Client B would be able to respond to comments or questions by third parties.
This action would demonstrate to Client B that Engineer A was acting in a professional and responsible manner and had nothing to hide or fear concerning the complaint.
the Board also clarified that it believed that Engineer A should have weighed providing Client B with some limited background information in a dispassionate and nonprejudicial matter for the benefit of all concerned, although it was not suggesting that Engineer A had an ethical obligation to report to Client B the ethics complaint filed against him.
TTL
@prefix case146: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/146#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
case146:Prudential_Disclosure_Invoked_in_BER_97-11_Discussion a proeth:PrudentialDisclosureasRelationalSelf-Protection,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Prudential Disclosure Invoked in BER 97-11 Discussion" ;
proeth:appliedto "Engineer A's decision not to proactively share background information about the pending ethics complaint with Client B" ;
proeth:balancingwith "Allegation-Adjudication Distinction in Disclosure Obligation",
"Personal Privacy Right in Professional Self-Disclosure" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteexpression "The Board noted that while Engineer A was not ethically obligated to disclose the pending complaint, Engineer A should have weighed providing Client B with limited background information in a dispassionate manner — doing so would have demonstrated professional responsibility and given Client B early notice to respond to third-party questions" ;
proeth:confidence "0.92" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "146" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-02-27T12:18:23.302560+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "146" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-02-27T12:18:23.302560+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "medium" ;
proeth:interpretation "Even when disclosure is not ethically required, voluntary provision of limited contextual information preserves the relational trust between engineer and client and positions the engineer as transparent and professional" ;
proeth:invokedby "Board of Ethical Review (BER 97-11)" ;
proeth:principleclass "Prudential Disclosure as Relational Self-Protection" ;
proeth:sourcetext "This action would demonstrate to Client B that Engineer A was acting in a professional and responsible manner and had nothing to hide or fear concerning the complaint." ;
proeth:tensionresolution "Prudential disclosure is framed as advisable but not obligatory — the engineer retains discretion, but the prudent choice favors proactive limited disclosure to protect the professional relationship" ;
proeth:textreferences "By providing Client B with some limited background information, Engineer A would be providing Client B with early notice of the pending matter so that Client B would be able to respond to comments or questions by third parties.",
"This action would demonstrate to Client B that Engineer A was acting in a professional and responsible manner and had nothing to hide or fear concerning the complaint.",
"the Board also clarified that it believed that Engineer A should have weighed providing Client B with some limited background information in a dispassionate and nonprejudicial matter for the benefit of all concerned, although it was not suggesting that Engineer A had an ethical obligation to report to Client B the ethics complaint filed against him." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 146 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-27T12:23:29.914048"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 146 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
146
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-02-27T12:18:23.302560+00:00
First case
146
Generated
2026-02-27T12:18:23.302560+00:00
Attributed to
Case 146 Extraction
Generated
2026-02-27T12:23:29.914048
Generated by
ProEthica Case 146 Extraction