Example of Ethics Case Study Discussion (similar to HW2)

In your discussion of each situation, consider:

1. What do societal values require in this case?
2. What do professional ethical standards require in this case? Cite relevant parts of the Codes
of Ethics (printed in part 1 of the assignment).
3. What would you do?

Cutting Roadside Trees

http://onlineethics.org/cases/pritchard/trees.html

Case summary (not needed in student discussion): Kevin Clearing is the engineering manager for the County
Road Commission (CRC), with a primary responsibility for county road safety. At least 1 person has died along a
given stretch of road each of the last 7 years by crashing into a roadside tree. May other accidents have occurred.
Two law suits were filed regarding the unsafe segment of the road, but were dismissed because the drivers were
exceeding the 45 mph speed limit. Kevin recommends that the road be widened, resulting in cutting down ~30 old
trees. Environmental groups protest, and file a petition signed to 150 people to save the trees. Public debate falls
on both sides of the issue.

Case question: Discuss how Kevin Clearing should proceed at this point.

Societal values (note: 2 examples would be fine, 1 on each side of the disagreement)
A variety of societal values pertain to this situation. Society values human life, so this would favor
widening the road and sacrificing the trees. Society also values following the law. Since it can be argued
that people in the accidents were speeding, and therefore violating the law, perhaps leaving the road is
fine. However, the information provided is incomplete because beyond the 2 law suits, some of the other
accidents may have occurred by people following the law (obeying speed limit, passing zones, etc) but
under adverse weather conditions or simple accidents. Society values environmental preservation, in
which case a solution that does not kill the trees should be found (maybe adding guardrails instead).
Finally, the U.S. is a democracy and as such values the opinion of the majority. Therefore, a county ballot
or other method to accurately determine a majority (the petition is one-sided at this point, and small since
the relevant population may be as high as the city population of 60,000) may be helpful.

Professional standards (note: cite 2 to 5 from either ASCE or NSPE code)

Relevant portions of the ASCE Code of Ethics are paraphrased below and the action resulting from the
code is then given.
ASCE Canon 1: paramount safety ... of the public
This supports removing the trees and widening the road.
ASCE Canon 1e: protection of the environment
This argues for saving the trees.
ASCE Canon 3a: endeavor to extend the public knowledge of engineering
This indicates that whatever decision is made, an effort should be made to educate public on why.

Recommended action for Kevin (and what I would do):

(1) First, I would hold a public meeting to inform public. It should be noted that 150 people on the
petition is a small fraction of persons affected (up to 60,000 in town, so there could be a silent majority in
favor of widening the road). Explain why technically the best solution is to widen the road.
(2) The county should widen the road and remove trees from the right-of-way for optimal safety.
(3) The county should relocate the displaced trees to other public property (a park, etc).

This solution accommodates both public safety and environmental preservation.