DP4
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/83#DP4
Properties
Instance of
Decision Point Id
DP4
Decision question
Should Engineer A include the biologist's threatened species finding in the written report submitted to the public authority, given that Engineer A has already verbally disclosed the concern to the developer client who has not explicitly invoked confidentiality?
Focus
Engineer A's obligation to include the threatened species finding in the written report submitted to the public authority, and whether verbal disclosure to the developer client satisfies any portion of that obligation
Option1
Include the biologist's threatened species finding in the written report submitted to the public authority, and proactively notify the developer client of its inclusion before submission so the client can prepare a response
Option2
Treat the verbal disclosure to the developer client as satisfying the notification obligation, and omit the finding from the written report on the basis that the client — having been informed — bears responsibility for deciding whether to relay the information to the public authority
Option3
Append the biologist's finding as a separate advisory memorandum transmitted directly to the public authority outside the main written report, thereby preserving the report's contracted scope while ensuring the authority receives the material information
Role
Engineer A
TTL
@prefix case83: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/83#> .
@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#> .
case83:DP4 a proeth-cases:DecisionPoint,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "DP4" ;
proeth:decisionPointId "DP4" ;
proeth:decisionQuestion "Should Engineer A include the biologist's threatened species finding in the written report submitted to the public authority, given that Engineer A has already verbally disclosed the concern to the developer client who has not explicitly invoked confidentiality?" ;
proeth:focus "Engineer A's obligation to include the threatened species finding in the written report submitted to the public authority, and whether verbal disclosure to the developer client satisfies any portion of that obligation" ;
proeth:option1 "Include the biologist's threatened species finding in the written report submitted to the public authority, and proactively notify the developer client of its inclusion before submission so the client can prepare a response" ;
proeth:option2 "Treat the verbal disclosure to the developer client as satisfying the notification obligation, and omit the finding from the written report on the basis that the client — having been informed — bears responsibility for deciding whether to relay the information to the public authority" ;
proeth:option3 "Append the biologist's finding as a separate advisory memorandum transmitted directly to the public authority outside the main written report, thereby preserving the report's contracted scope while ensuring the authority receives the material information" ;
proeth:roleLabel "Engineer A" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-27T19:32:42.601908"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 83 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Generated
2026-02-27T19:32:42.601908
Generated by
ProEthica Case 83 Extraction