PROFESSIONAL CODES

Readings:

• Ladd (CESV, p583-584):
  1. First, the objective of a professional code might be inspirational......
  2. A second objective might be to alert professionals to the moral aspects of their work that they have overlooked.
  3. Third, a code migt, as it was traditionally, be a disciplinary code or a penal code.
  4. A fourth objective of a code might be to offer advice in cases of moral perplexity about what to do:......
  5. A fifth objective of a professional code of ethics is to alert prospective clients of employers what they may and may not expect in the way of service....
  Note: Ladd continues to describe and discuss secondary and mischievous objectives of codes which are generally contradictory to the purpose.

• Martin & Schinzinger (CESV, p576-577) Roles of Codes:
  • Inspiration and Guiding
  • Support
  • Deterrence and Discipline
  • Educational and Mutual Understanding
  • Contributing to the Professions Public Image
  • Protecting the Status Quo
  • Promoting Business Interests
  The third purpose listed in both criteria (discipline) is at odds with and duplicates the police powers delegated to states and smaller municipalities. Although there is an absence of governmental regulation, ethic codes only give us a false sense of security and power. The argument that the codes of lawyers and doctors are stringent enough does not apply, because many of these regulations have been incorporated into law.

• Cases in which professional codes have been at odds with pre-existing laws and/or violated constitutional rights. (Martin & Schinzinger (CESV, p577) and Bowie (CR, p197))
  • National Society of Professional Engineers v. United States (1978)
  • American Society of Mechanical Engineers v. Hydrolevel Corporation (1982)
  • Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council Inc. (1976)
  • Bates v. State Bar of Arizona (1978)
• Police Powers are directly in the hands of the states to regulate harms which might jeopardize the welfare of the citizens (paternalistic grants), therefore there is no need for duplicative, unenforceable codes.

  Amendment X, U.S. Constitution

  The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution , nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

  Martin & Schinzinger (CESV, p578):
  Developing elaborate paralegal procedures within professional societies runs the risk of needlessly and at considerable cost duplicating a function better left to the real legal system.

• Codes create a false sense of security and power. Ladd (CESV, p585):

  ......having a code will give a sense of complacency to professionals about their conduct. We have a code of ethics, they will say, so everything we do is ethical.........a professional may be encouraged by the code to deliver what is minimal rather than the best he can do.

  The first and fourth objectives (guidance and education) of ethical codes, as set forth by Ladd and Martin & Schinzinger, do nothing but reaffirm values already present in society. Doing so only causes professionals to feel that their morals and constraints are somehow different. In actuality their ethics are not just the same, but must remain the same in order to support cohesion of society. Mill, in his strange liberal utilitarianism, describes the constraint of peoples morals as the tyranny of the majority. Cruel or benevolent -- societies are societies because they adhere to a general set of principles such as honesty.

• Ethical codes separate professionals from society. Ladd (CESV, p581)

  Professionals are not, simply because they are professionals, exempt from the common obligations, duties and responsibilities that are binding on ordinary people. They do not have a special moral status that allows them to do things that no one else can.

  Ladd (CESV, p582)

  ........it should not be necessary to devise a special code to tell professionals that they ought to refrain from cheating or lying, or to make them treat clients (and patients) with respect, or to tell them that they ought to ask for informed consent for invassive actions.

  Martin & Schinzinger (CESV, p580)

  Andrew Oldenquist (a philosopher) and Edward Slowter (an engineer and former NSPE president) point out how the existence of separate codes for different professional engineering societies can give members the feeling that ethical conduct is more relative than it is, and how it can convey to the public the view that none of the codes is really right.

  The second principle (support) tends to imply that when pushed to choose between my morals and business, I will choose morals because I can pass the blame on to certain words. To say that violation of the code will result in punishment, means that the code need not be a code but rather a law. I seriously doubt any professional, who under great pressure, will then look words resembling the Boy Scout Pledge of Honor as a means of defense against his employer. The concern with and reason for ethical codes is to express the majoritys wishes against the rogue violator. I would argue that anyone willing to go against societys norms and values is not all that intimidated by powerless words. The resulting effect is that a professional, such as in the case of an engineer, will risk fudging things knowing that there is ultimately a less moral engineer who is more than willing to part with his morals and undertake the risk of being caught.

• Examples for argument:
  • Challenger
  • Oppenheimer
• Example of an empty, powerless ethics code:
  • ACM (please see attached sheet)