Carl works for general purpose software and hardware company on a project for the military. The project involves developing a system that monitors radar signals for missiles and launches nuclear missiles when deemed necessary. Carl was initially reluctant but eventually agrees. His thinking was that if he does not do it, someone else will anyway. During his work he develops some reservations concerning the fine distinction between missiles and small planes. He expresses this to his manager who promptly dismisses the claim on the basis that he does not agree with the claim and that the project was already late.

Carl feels morally responsible. What should he do? What can he do?

LJ has a computer science degree and has three years work experience. She has her own company and one of the current projects involved designing an employee database for a large company. The database contains medical records, performance evaluation, salary etc. She must decide on the security required for this system. The question is how much security.

She believes that the client should have all the necessary information that the client can use to based their decision on. She then presents ALL available options to the clients, with the level of security proportional to the cost. The client chooses the cheapest and least secure option, which leads LJ to feel that this is insecure. She explains the risks to the client but they sticks with the cheapest option. Should LJ refuse to build the system? Should she have presented this option to the client in the first place?

Juan is a private consultant. His job is to evaluate automation needs and recommend suitable systems. Recently he was hired by a hospital to upgrade their systems. He recommended (with reasons) Tri-Star as a best system to upgrade to. However he failed to mention that he is a partner in Tri-Star and that there is a conflict of interest. Was his behaviour unethical? Should he have: