DP4

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

DP4

Should the NSPE Board of Directors retain the 'When in Rome' foreign-practice exception to core ethics prohibitions, or rescind it to prevent the erosion of domestic ethical standards through precedential slippage?

The NSPE Board of Directors adopted a 'When in Rome' clause in July 1966 to permit submission of tenders for work in foreign countries when required by local laws, regulations, or practices. This clause institutionally codified a geographic exception to the competitive bidding prohibition. The NSPE Board must decide whether to retain or rescind this clause, weighing the practical accommodation of foreign business realities against the systemic risk that any foreign-practice exception will erode the domestic ethical standard through analogical extension.

Keep the foreign-practice exception in place, treating it as a narrowly scoped pragmatic accommodation of genuine international business realities that does not create meaningful precedential pressure on domestic standards because the foreign context is sufficiently distinct.

Eliminate the foreign-practice exception entirely, recognizing that any geographic carve-out to a core ethics prohibition creates a slippery slope toward domestic erosion by establishing the precedent that local or area practice can override the Code's universal prohibitions.

Retain the clause in modified form, explicitly limiting its scope to procedural or administrative foreign requirements while categorically excluding any exception for gift-giving to government officials or other corrupt payment arrangements, thereby preserving operational flexibility without sanctioning corruption.

NSPE Board of Directors (Institutional Ethics Governance)