Faithful Agent Obligation Within Ethical Limits Invoked by BER Discussion Section
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/88#Faithful_Agent_Obligation_Within_Ethical_Limits_Invoked_by_BER_Discussion_Section
Properties
Instance of
FaithfulAgentObligationWithinEthicalLimits
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#FaithfulAgentObligationWithinEthicalLimits
Applied to
Escalation and withdrawal decision
Tidal crossing design engagement with Client B
Balancing with
Non-Acquiescence to Client Directive Suppressing Safety Analysis
Public Welfare Paramount
Concrete expression
The BER's structured escalation pathway — engage Client B, propose regulatory report, withdraw — operationalizes the faithful agent principle: Engineer A must serve Client B's legitimate interests diligently while retaining the authority and obligation to escalate or withdraw when Client B's direction conflicts with public welfare obligations.
Confidence
0.92
Importance
high
Interpretation
In this context, the faithful agent principle requires Engineer A to first engage Client B in good faith discussions about the need for specialized analysis before escalating — preserving the client relationship to the extent possible while retaining the independent professional obligation to protect the public.
Invoked by
Engineer A Climate Change Impact Evaluating Infrastructure Engineer
Tension resolution
Faithful agent obligation yields to public welfare paramount when Client B refuses both analysis and regulatory disclosure; Engineer A must withdraw rather than continue serving a client whose direction conflicts with public protection obligations.
Source Evidence
Source text
Engineer A should engage Client B in discussions about the need for the detailed evaluation and disclosure of the potential impacts on the public and alternatives for the project to mitigate those impacts, and the potential risk to Client B of not evaluating the potential impacts.
Text references
Engineer A should engage Client B in discussions about the need for the detailed evaluation and disclosure of the potential impacts on the public and alternatives for the project to mitigate those impacts, and the potential risk to Client B of not evaluating the potential impacts.
Failing agreement by Client B to either of these courses of action the BER believes that Engineer A should withdraw from the project.
If Client B remains unconvinced, Engineer A should propose to Client B that engineer a provides the potential concern that may necessitate more detailed evaluation in an engineering report for consideration by regulatory agencies and the public.
TTL
@prefix case88: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/88#> .
@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#> .
case88:Faithful_Agent_Obligation_Within_Ethical_Limits_Invoked_by_BER_Discussion_Section a proeth:FaithfulAgentObligationWithinEthicalLimits,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Faithful Agent Obligation Within Ethical Limits Invoked by BER Discussion Section" ;
proeth:appliedto "Escalation and withdrawal decision",
"Tidal crossing design engagement with Client B" ;
proeth:balancingwith "Non-Acquiescence to Client Directive Suppressing Safety Analysis",
"Public Welfare Paramount" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteexpression "The BER's structured escalation pathway — engage Client B, propose regulatory report, withdraw — operationalizes the faithful agent principle: Engineer A must serve Client B's legitimate interests diligently while retaining the authority and obligation to escalate or withdraw when Client B's direction conflicts with public welfare obligations." ;
proeth:confidence "0.92" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "88" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-02-27T14:20:08.457238+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "88" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-02-27T14:20:08.457238+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:interpretation "In this context, the faithful agent principle requires Engineer A to first engage Client B in good faith discussions about the need for specialized analysis before escalating — preserving the client relationship to the extent possible while retaining the independent professional obligation to protect the public." ;
proeth:invokedby "Engineer A Climate Change Impact Evaluating Infrastructure Engineer" ;
proeth:principleclass "Faithful Agent Obligation Within Ethical Limits" ;
proeth:sourcetext "Engineer A should engage Client B in discussions about the need for the detailed evaluation and disclosure of the potential impacts on the public and alternatives for the project to mitigate those impacts, and the potential risk to Client B of not evaluating the potential impacts." ;
proeth:tensionresolution "Faithful agent obligation yields to public welfare paramount when Client B refuses both analysis and regulatory disclosure; Engineer A must withdraw rather than continue serving a client whose direction conflicts with public protection obligations." ;
proeth:textreferences "Engineer A should engage Client B in discussions about the need for the detailed evaluation and disclosure of the potential impacts on the public and alternatives for the project to mitigate those impacts, and the potential risk to Client B of not evaluating the potential impacts.",
"Failing agreement by Client B to either of these courses of action the BER believes that Engineer A should withdraw from the project.",
"If Client B remains unconvinced, Engineer A should propose to Client B that engineer a provides the potential concern that may necessitate more detailed evaluation in an engineering report for consideration by regulatory agencies and the public." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 88 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-28T10:32:26.864078"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 88 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
88
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-02-27T14:20:08.457238+00:00
First case
88
Generated
2026-02-27T14:20:08.457238+00:00
Attributed to
Case 88 Extraction
Generated
2026-02-28T10:32:26.864078
Generated by
ProEthica Case 88 Extraction