Project Withdrawal as Ethical Recourse Invoked for Engineer A Dangerous Project
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/89#Project_Withdrawal_as_Ethical_Recourse_Invoked_for_Engineer_A_Dangerous_Project
Properties
Instance of
ProjectWithdrawalasEthicalRecourseWhenSafetyStandardsRejected
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#ProjectWithdrawalasEthicalRecourseWhenSafetyStandardsRejected
Applied to
Engineer A's options upon client refusal to hire on-site project representative
Balancing with
Client Loyalty
Faithful Agent Obligation Within Ethical Limits
Concrete expression
When the client refused to hire the full-time on-site project representative that Engineer A had professionally determined was necessary for the dangerous construction project, Engineer A's ethical recourse was to insist on the safety measure or refuse to continue work — not to proceed under the inadequate safety arrangement
Confidence
0.96
Importance
high
Interpretation
The Board explicitly states that Engineer A 'should have insisted that the client hire the on-site project representative or refuse to continue to work on the project' — establishing project withdrawal as the appropriate ethical response when client refuses a professionally determined safety requirement
Invoked by
NSPE Board of Ethical Review
Tension resolution
Project withdrawal obligation prevails over continuation of client service when the client refuses a safety measure the engineer has professionally determined to be necessary
Source Evidence
Source text
Engineer A should have insisted that the client hire the on-site project representative or refuse to continue to work on the project. While this might appear to be a harsh result, we think that such an approach is the only one that would be consistent with the Code of Ethics.
Text references
Engineer A should have insisted that the client hire the on-site project representative or refuse to continue to work on the project
While this might appear to be a harsh result, we think that such an approach is the only one that would be consistent with the Code of Ethics
TTL
@prefix case89: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/89#> .
@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#> .
case89:Project_Withdrawal_as_Ethical_Recourse_Invoked_for_Engineer_A_Dangerous_Project a proeth:ProjectWithdrawalasEthicalRecourseWhenSafetyStandardsRejected,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Project Withdrawal as Ethical Recourse Invoked for Engineer A Dangerous Project" ;
proeth:appliedto "Engineer A's options upon client refusal to hire on-site project representative" ;
proeth:balancingwith "Client Loyalty",
"Faithful Agent Obligation Within Ethical Limits" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteexpression "When the client refused to hire the full-time on-site project representative that Engineer A had professionally determined was necessary for the dangerous construction project, Engineer A's ethical recourse was to insist on the safety measure or refuse to continue work — not to proceed under the inadequate safety arrangement" ;
proeth:confidence "0.96" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "89" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T18:14:32.608873+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "89" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T18:14:32.608873+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:interpretation "The Board explicitly states that Engineer A 'should have insisted that the client hire the on-site project representative or refuse to continue to work on the project' — establishing project withdrawal as the appropriate ethical response when client refuses a professionally determined safety requirement" ;
proeth:invokedby "NSPE Board of Ethical Review" ;
proeth:principleclass "Project Withdrawal as Ethical Recourse When Safety Standards Rejected" ;
proeth:sourcetext "Engineer A should have insisted that the client hire the on-site project representative or refuse to continue to work on the project. While this might appear to be a harsh result, we think that such an approach is the only one that would be consistent with the Code of Ethics." ;
proeth:tensionresolution "Project withdrawal obligation prevails over continuation of client service when the client refuses a safety measure the engineer has professionally determined to be necessary" ;
proeth:textreferences "Engineer A should have insisted that the client hire the on-site project representative or refuse to continue to work on the project",
"While this might appear to be a harsh result, we think that such an approach is the only one that would be consistent with the Code of Ethics" ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 89 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T18:38:27.071324"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 89 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
89
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-03-01T18:14:32.608873+00:00
First case
89
Generated
2026-03-01T18:14:32.608873+00:00
Attributed to
Case 89 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T18:38:27.071324
Generated by
ProEthica Case 89 Extraction