Engineer A is certainly free to disclose his autism if he so chooses. However, the NSPE Code of Ethics does not compel disclosure nor does a failure to disclose somehow constitutes a “deception.”

As the Board has stated on numerous occasions, the obligation to provide full and complete disclosure to employers or clients is a critical one for professional engineers. The scope of this obligation is sometimes subject to examination depending on the issues involved and other factors. Previous Board of Ethical Review cases provide some background for considering this case. The first is BER Case 97-11, in which Engineer A was retained by Client B to perform design services and provide a critical path method schedule for a manufacturing facility. Engineer A prepared the plans, specifications, and the CPM schedule. During the rendering of services to Client B, the state board of professional engineers contacted Engineer A about an ethics complaint filed against Engineer A. The complaint was filed by Client C relating to services provided on a project for Client C that were similar to the services being performed for Client B. Client C alleged that Engineer A lacked the competence to perform the services in question. Engineer A did not believe it was necessary to notify Client B of the pending complaint. Later, through another party, Client B learned of the ethics complaint filed against Engineer A and told Engineer A that he was upset by the allegations and that Engineer A should have brought the matter to Client B's attention. The Board found that it was ethical for Engineer A not to report to Client B the ethics complaint filed against Engineer A by Client C. In its decision, the Board noted that while an engineer clearly has an ethical obligation to act as a faithful agent and trustee for the benefit of a client, avoid deceptive acts, be objective and truthful, avoid conflicts, etc., such obligations would not compel an engineer to automatically disclose that a complaint had been filed against the engineer with the state engineering licensure board. As the Board explained, a complaint is a mere allegation and does not amount to a finding of fact or conclusion o...

Engineer A, a professional engineer licensed in four states, specializes in air pollution control and air emissions permitting and has practiced professional engineering successfully for 25 years for multiple employers. Engineer A has autism and, more specifically, Asperger’s Syndrome. Engineer A has kept this fact not only from his current employer (which he has worked for 5 years) but also previous employers.Engineer A recently attended an autism support conference. One of the speakers presented on self-advocacy, which encourages autistic individuals, when able, to share who they are and what they can do. The speaker noted that a person with autism needs to be treated with respect and not as someone with “special needs.”After considerable thought, Engineer A considered the language in the NSPE Code of Ethics, which requires engineers to “avoid deceptive acts.” Engineer A would like to be open about his autism, but because Engineer A obtained his employment without disclosing his autism, Engineer A is concerned that doing so might place his career in jeopardy. At the least, disclosure could limit his career options if his employer and potential future employers have biases or concerns about client interactions.

What are Engineer A’s ethical obligations under the circumstances?