Obligation-Conflict Resolution

Case 16-5 (2016) · Public Health, Safety, and Welfare—Driverless/Autonomous Vehicle

Professional obligations conflict, and the board applies no fixed rule for which one wins. Each resolution is recorded as three edges: competesWith (the tension), prevailsOver (the obligation the board allowed to win in this case), and defeasibleUnder (the situation under which the yielding obligation gives way). The same tension is then traced across comparable cases, where its resolution shifts with context. Hover any obligation or state to see its definition; click to open it in OntServe.
How this case resolved it
Featured
Engineer A AV Risk Assessment Third-Party Safety Consideration Obligation prevails over Engineer A AV Faithful Agent Informed Decision Enablement Obligation
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
  • Competing Duties — Passenger Safety vs. Aggregate Harm Minimization
  • Engineer A Ethical Dilemma — Harm Allocation Recommendation
  • Passenger Safety vs. Third-Party Harm Minimization Algorithm Conflict
  • Present Case Regulatory Standards Vacuum for Autonomous Vehicle Ethics
  • Public Safety at Risk — Autonomous Vehicle Third-Party Harm
Engineer A Autonomous Vehicle Further Study Recommendation Obligation prevails over Engineer A AV Faithful Agent Informed Decision Enablement Obligation
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
  • Competing Duties — Passenger Safety vs. Aggregate Harm Minimization
  • Engineer A Ethical Dilemma — Harm Allocation Recommendation
  • Passenger Safety vs. Third-Party Harm Minimization Algorithm Conflict
  • Present Case Regulatory Standards Vacuum for Autonomous Vehicle Ethics
  • Public Safety at Risk — Autonomous Vehicle Third-Party Harm
Engineer A AV Risk Assessment Third-Party Safety Consideration Obligation prevails over Engineer A AV Risk Assessment Team Harm Minimization Participation Obligation
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
  • Autonomous Vehicle Ethics Regulatory Standards Vacuum
  • Passenger Safety vs. Third-Party Harm Minimization Algorithm Conflict
Engineer A AV Moral Framework Public Transparency Recommendation Obligation prevails over Engineer A AV Faithful Agent Informed Decision Enablement Obligation
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
  • Competing Duties — Passenger Safety vs. Aggregate Harm Minimization
  • Engineer A Ethical Dilemma — Harm Allocation Recommendation
  • Passenger Safety vs. Third-Party Harm Minimization Algorithm Conflict
  • Present Case Regulatory Standards Vacuum for Autonomous Vehicle Ethics
  • Public Safety at Risk — Autonomous Vehicle Third-Party Harm
Engineer A AV Further Study Recommendation Before Deployment Obligation prevails over Engineer A AV Faithful Agent Informed Decision Enablement Obligation
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
  • Competing Duties — Passenger Safety vs. Aggregate Harm Minimization
  • Engineer A Ethical Dilemma — Harm Allocation Recommendation
  • Passenger Safety vs. Third-Party Harm Minimization Algorithm Conflict
  • Present Case Regulatory Standards Vacuum for Autonomous Vehicle Ethics
  • Public Safety at Risk — Autonomous Vehicle Third-Party Harm
Engineer A BER 96-4 Additional Testing Recommendation Obligation prevails over Engineer A BER 96-4 Business Pressure Non-Subordination Obligation
the two obligations are in tension (competesWith)
the yielding obligation gives way only under (defeasibleUnder):
  • BER Case 96-4 Multi-Factor Business-Safety Balancing
  • BER Case 96-4 Public Safety at Risk from Safety-Critical Software
Open tensions recorded without a resolution: Engineer A AV Faithful Agent Informed Decision Enablement Obligation vs Engineer A Autonomous Vehicle Do No Harm Obligation Engineer A AV Moral Framework Public Transparency Recommendation Obligation vs Engineer A AV Risk Assessment Team Harm Minimization Participation Obligation
What the board concluded
  • That being said, to address the specific question posed in the case, Engineer A has an obligation to state that the prime ethical obligation of the vehicle operation is to minimize harm to affect the least number of persons.
How comparable cases resolved the same tension

A faithful-agent duty yields to a public-protection obligation. The yielding obligation ("Faithful Agent") recurs across cases; the obligation that overrides it and the context under which it yields differ case by case. This is the case-law move: not a single rule, but a family of context-indexed resolutions.

Case Obligation that prevailed Yielding obligation Context (defeasibleUnder)
24-01
Balancing Client Directives and Public...
Engineer L Client Budget Pressure Refusal Engineer L Faithful Agent Boundary Engineer L Confirmed Risk Without Safeguards; Engineer L Resource Constrained Client
Engineer L Client Override Regulatory Report Engineer L Faithful Agent Boundary Engineer L Confirmed Risk Without Safeguards; Engineer L Resource Constrained Client
20-4
Public Health, Safety, and...
Engineer B Post-Override Regulatory Reporting Engineer B Faithful Agent Boundary MWC Override of Engineers A and B
Engineer A Post-Override Regulatory Reporting Engineer A Faithful Agent Boundary MWC Override of Engineers A and B
95-5
Failure To Include Information In...
Engineer B Expert Witness Neutrality Engineer B Faithful Agent Boundary Engineer B Adversarial Engagement; Engineer B Client Defense Bias
Engineer B Complete Technical Reporting Engineer B Faithful Agent Boundary Engineer B Adversarial Engagement; Engineer B Client Defense Bias
04-8
Public Welfare—Client Action Following...
Engineer A Safety Obligation Wetland Fill Engineer A Faithful Agent Limits Wetland Engineer A Confirmed Environmental Risk; Engineer A Faithful Agent Duty Conflict
Engineer A Wetland Confidentiality Limits Engineer A Faithful Agent Limits Wetland Engineer A Confirmed Environmental Risk; Engineer A Faithful Agent Duty Conflict