DP8
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/160#DP8
Properties
Instance of
Decision Point Id
DP8
Decision question
After withdrawing from the project, must Company B engineers also notify an appropriate regulatory authority or professional society of the safety danger, or does refusal to participate itself fully discharge their public-safety obligation?
Focus
Company B Engineers: Whether Refusal to Participate Fully Discharges the Public Safety Duty or Requires Additional External Escalation
Option1
Refuse all project participation and additionally notify an appropriate regulatory authority or professional society of the specific safety deficiencies, on the grounds that withdrawal alone leaves the ultimate users unprotected if Company A proceeds through other means.
Option2
Refuse all project participation and treat that refusal as fully discharging the public-safety obligation, on the grounds that the graduated escalation sequence — internal notification, inter-firm referral, impartial arbitration proposal, withdrawal — is the complete ethical prescription and external regulatory notification is not required absent imminent, certain danger.
Option3
Refuse all project participation and refer the matter to the relevant professional engineering society for an ethics opinion or peer review, treating society involvement as an intermediate step between withdrawal and direct regulatory notification that preserves the documented record of dissent without the finality of a regulatory complaint.
Role
Company B Engineers
TTL
@prefix case160: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/160#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@prefix proeth-cases: <http://proethica.org/ontology/cases#> .
@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#> .
case160:DP8 a proeth-cases:DecisionPoint,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "DP8" ;
proeth:decisionPointId "DP8" ;
proeth:decisionQuestion "After withdrawing from the project, must Company B engineers also notify an appropriate regulatory authority or professional society of the safety danger, or does refusal to participate itself fully discharge their public-safety obligation?" ;
proeth:focus "Company B Engineers: Whether Refusal to Participate Fully Discharges the Public Safety Duty or Requires Additional External Escalation" ;
proeth:option1 "Refuse all project participation and additionally notify an appropriate regulatory authority or professional society of the specific safety deficiencies, on the grounds that withdrawal alone leaves the ultimate users unprotected if Company A proceeds through other means." ;
proeth:option2 "Refuse all project participation and treat that refusal as fully discharging the public-safety obligation, on the grounds that the graduated escalation sequence — internal notification, inter-firm referral, impartial arbitration proposal, withdrawal — is the complete ethical prescription and external regulatory notification is not required absent imminent, certain danger." ;
proeth:option3 "Refuse all project participation and refer the matter to the relevant professional engineering society for an ethics opinion or peer review, treating society involvement as an intermediate step between withdrawal and direct regulatory notification that preserves the documented record of dissent without the finality of a regulatory complaint." ;
proeth:roleLabel "Company B Engineers" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-02T15:10:46.722832"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 160 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Generated
2026-03-02T15:10:46.722832
Generated by
ProEthica Case 160 Extraction