DP2

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

DP2

Should Engineer T escalate the post-accident error concern to Engineer B with full factual disclosure and seek an independent, disinterested professional review of the error question, given that Engineer B's institutional stake in a 'no error' outcome creates a structural conflict of interest that undermines the legitimacy of a purely internal supervisory determination?

Engineer T's obligation, upon forming a good-faith post-accident belief that the design approach may have constituted a professional error, to escalate that concern to Engineer B with full factual disclosure — and Engineer B's corresponding obligation to conduct a good-faith, conflict-of-interest-free review of that concern — so that the firm's institutional 'no error' determination is reached through a legitimate professional process rather than one distorted by XYZ's litigation exposure.

Escalate the error concern to Engineer B with full factual disclosure and simultaneously seek independent peer review from a disinterested senior engineer outside XYZ Consulting Engineers, or consult an NSPE ethics resource, before accepting the supervisory 'no error' determination as final

Escalate the error concern to Engineer B with full factual disclosure and defer to Engineer B's supervisory determination as the firm's institutional resolution, without seeking independent external review

Engineer T