If I understand things correctly, there is a general consensus among surveyors that a code of general ethical principles is necessary, such as this Code of Ethics published by the ACSM:
Section 1: Members should strive continuously to improve knowledge and skill and make available to their colleagues and the public the benefits of their professional expertise.
Section 2: Members should maintain high professional and scientific standards and should not voluntarily collaborate professionally with anyone who violates this principle.
Section 3: The College, and its members, should safeguard the public and itself against members who are deficient in ethical conduct.
Section 4: The ideals of the College imply that the responsibilities of each Fellow or member extend not only to the individual, but also to society with the purpose of improving both the health and well-being of the individual and the community.
College? What? Oh, did you think that this was the ACSM code of ethics? Understandable that you would. However, this "ACSM" is the American College of Sports Medicine as the following that are nearer to Minimum Technical Standards reflect:
1. Members should treat or train athletes with the objective of maintaining the integrity of competition and fair play.
2. Members should treat or train every athlete with the utmost care and to the highest level of their professional competence.
3. Members should acknowledge that they are aware of international doping control standards as determined by the List of Prohibited Substances and Methods published by the World Anti-Doping Program or by the relevant Anti-Doping Authority.
4. Members should treat athletes only as their medical conditions warrant and will observe the rules of the appropriate anti-doping organizations regarding use of prohibited substances or methods.
5. Members should not advise, aid, or abet any athlete to use prohibited substances or methods of doping.
6. Members should use all means possible to deter doping by athletes.
7. Members should maintain confidentiality of personal medical information and will protect the right of the clean athlete to compete.
8. Members should agree that departure from these principles of ethical behavior in treating athletes may result in sanctions by ACSM and will accept those sanctions as determined.
The point is really that the substance of ethics lies in the specifics of rules, not the overly broad generalities that apply equally to doctoring football players and surveying house lots.
I disagree. Ethics are broad ideals that guide your career and life. Once they are reduced to a set of rules they are no longer ethics - they are rules.
Rules may be in interpretation of ethics, but they are not ethics. They may attempt to tell you what is ethical, but that's just some one's or some groups interpretation.
Our professional organization is called the Surveying & Spatial Sciences Institute (SSSI).
Since it covers a lot more than just Land Surveying it's code of ethics is a bit general.
Code of Ethics
The members of the Institute are bound by a common commitment to promote Surveying and Spatial Sciences and facilitate its practice for the common good of the community based upon shared values of:
• Competence
• Truth
• Innovative practice
• Excellence
• Equality of opportunity
• Social justice
• Ethical behaviour
The community places its trust in the judgement and integrity of members to pursue the stated values and has a right to a high degree of confidence.
Surveying and Spatial Science professionals recognise that their ethical responsibilities extend to the community, to their clients and employers, to their peers and to their employees. Accordingly they acknowledge the need for integrity, independence, care and competence, and a sense of duty. They uphold and advance these values by:
• supporting and participating in the continuing development of the Surveying and Spatial Science profession;
• serving with honesty and forthrightness and within areas of their competence; and
• using their expertise for the enhancement of society and the stewardship of resources.
Surveying & Spatial Sciences Institute members are required to abide by the Code of Ethics as a condition of their membership. The Code of Ethics provides a statement of principles which has been adopted by the Consultative Council of the Institute as the basis upon which members shall conduct their activities in order to meet community trust. The code is the framework from which rules of Conduct may be developed by the Consultative Council.
The Tenets of the Code of Ethics
1. Members’ responsibility for the welfare and rights of the community shall come before their responsibility to their profession, sectional or private interests or to other members;
2. Members shall act with integrity, dignity and honour to merit the trust of the community and the profession;
3. Members shall act with honesty, good faith and equity; and without discrimination; towards all in the community;
4. Members shall provide services and advice carefully and diligently only within their areas of competence;
5. Members shall develop their knowledge, skills and expertise continuously through their careers, and actively encourage their associates to do likewise;
6. Members shall apply their skills and knowledge in the interests of their clients or employers for whom they will act without compromising any other of these tenets;
7. Members shall take reasonable steps to inform themselves, their clients or employers of the economic, social, environmental or legal consequences which may arise from their actions; and
8. Members shall inform their clients or employers of any interest which may be, or may be perceived as being, in conflict with their interests, or which may affect the quality of service or impartial judgement
Qualifications and Competence
Qualifications denote the foundation of knowledge that a member has achieved through formal education, experience, post graduate learning or a combination from all of these sources. Designation as a Certified Professional (discipline specific) or Certified Practitioner of the Institute denotes peer recognition of adequate qualifications and competencies for those titles. Competence is demonstrated by application of knowledge and skills to provide service, advice or opinion to clients or employers.
By carefully limiting the professional work undertaken within the limits of qualifications and competence, members protect the interests of the community, clients, employers and themselves.
http://www.sssi.org.au/userfiles/docs/documents_13016543106780.pdf
I agree. The study of ethics is important because by definition the questions are tough ones that defy standardized rules.
The legal profession has codified ethics in what is called the Rules of Professional Conduct. As one might imagine it is extremely complex, a required course of study, much litigation related to interpreting it, about as clear as a health care law and as long, and if anyone is actually reprimanded under it, it is likely for a clear violation such as stealing money from a client.
Here is a link to how NY handles the issue. These practice guidelines are not law but are intended to guide surveyors to perform in a way that they will meet the law. They cover the research topic, although the board is asking for "reasonable certainty" and the state courts only require "a fair degree of certainty" for determination of a boundary line.
NY Standards
If they changed most of those "SHOULD"s to "SHALL"s, the situation would be much improved, methinks. Pretty toothless, otherwise......
> I disagree. Ethics are broad ideals that guide your career and life[/i]. Once they are reduced to a set of rules they are no longer ethics - they are rules.
>
> Rules may be in interpretation of ethics, but they are not ethics. They may attempt to tell you what is ethical, but that's just some one's or some groups interpretation.
I think that you may have mistakenly conceptualized ethics for morals which is common in these discussions.
Code of ethics are rules but also signposts to advise one about ethical behavior.
This.
Plus, if I remember Philosophy 102 correctly, there is sort of a three step process to defining a (for lack of a better term) system of ethics: meta-ethics, normative ethics, then applied ethics.
Most professional code of ethics I've seen tend to jump straight to applying ethics with no thought to where the "ethical" principles come from or how they are derived. But I don't think that's specific to professional ethics; Athena is the god of the modern western culture. What currently "is" is treated as if sprung forth from Zeus's forehead fully grown and armed; no thought is given to how anything became what it is.
Kind of like surveying a property with just the current deed and not researching back to see how it came about. 😀
eth·ics
?eTHiks/
noun
1.
moral principles that govern a person's or group's behavior.
"Judeo-Christian ethics"
synonyms: moral code, morals, morality, values, rights and wrongs, principles, ideals, standards (of behavior), value system, virtues, dictates of conscience More
the moral correctness of specified conduct.
"the ethics of euthanasia"
2.
the branch of knowledge that deals with moral principles.
I would think that the entities that are applying ethics would think that they are sane and reasonable humans with a high moral standard for the good of all.
Of course, that is the fallible rub so to speak.
As you noted, ethics is a philosophical dialogue and always has been from the Greeks to Spinoza to Homer Simpson to Kent McMillan.;-)
Sort of an Aquinas-esque distinction between Natural and Human law. I sense a period of Catholic education in your past 😉
> I agree. The study of ethics is important because by definition the questions are tough ones that defy standardized rules.
Well, here is how the standards you cite deal with ethical rules:
The practice of a profession is a public trust, earned through educational preparation, experience, and examination and a commitment on the part of the practitioner to public service. The professional carries out that trust in accordance with principles developed through years often decades and even centuries of the best professional traditions, and in accordance with State laws, rules, and regulations. Professional practitioners are urged to be always conscious of the very special obligations of public service and of ethical conduct that the privilege of licensure creates.
In other words, the NY statement amounts to:
(a) surveying is very, very important,
(b) surveyors have over a long period of time developed ideas about what good surveying is,
(c) do a good job, and
(d) always remember that surveying is very, very important.
> Most professional code of ethics I've seen tend to jump straight to applying ethics with no thought to where the "ethical" principles come from or how they are derived. But I don't think that's specific to professional ethics; Athena is the god of the modern western culture. What currently "is" is treated as if sprung forth from Zeus's forehead fully grown and armed; no thought is given to how anything became what it is.
Exactly. Ethical rules are simply components of culture that amount to rules of conduct. Don't lie to clients. Don't lead clients to think that surveying is a worthless activity. Those are both rules of conduct that generally would be considered to deal with ethics.
Like any other aspect of culture, ethics exist because they are adaptations that serve to improve the performance of some element of the society that holds them. In the case of land surveying, that element is the entire system of real property ownership and use that land surveying is a part of.
As with culture, there are some rules that are informally followed by members of the culture, but cannot be stated by them, although they may be obvious to an outsider. The vague, aspirational statements of professional ethics fall into that category. There are formal rules, which are rules that can be stated but aren't really open to question or discussion, and there are technical rules that are subject to change, question, and discussion.
> The Tenets of the Code of Ethics
>
> 1. Members’ responsibility for the welfare and rights of the community shall come before their responsibility to their profession, sectional or private interests or to other members;
It seems to me that this is an improper formulation in that it fails to acknowledge the reciprocal relationship between a profession and the public. Licensed professions exist in the first place because they have been created as such by the public through their elected government, so it is fair to say that there is a general societal need for the profession. This means that the public interest is served by the profession remaining viable and sustainable.
> 2. Members shall act with integrity, dignity and honour to merit the trust of the community and the profession;
What does that really mean? Don't chew with your mouth open? Relate to your clients as if you're the one member of the royal family who hasn't made it into the tabloids yet?
> 3. Members shall act with honesty, good faith and equity; and without discrimination; towards all in the community;
Don't lie to clients. Do what you agree to do. Do not disregard the rights of adjoining landowners.
> 4. Members shall provide services and advice carefully and diligently only within their areas of competence;
Don't try to do something you don't know how to do unless you have a reasonable expectation from prior experience of being able to figure out how to do it competently.
> 5. Members shall develop their knowledge, skills and expertise continuously through their careers, and actively encourage their associates to do likewise;
The essence of the surveying profession is specialized knowledge and technical proficiency. Both have implications for the provision of surveying services with reasonable efficiency about which a surveyor should make rational judgments to properly servce clients. This may from time to time require the surveyor to sit in some darkened hotel conference room and watch a Power Point presentation for seemingly endless hours.
> 6. Members shall apply their skills and knowledge in the interests of their clients or employers for whom they will act without compromising any other of these tenets;
Huh?
> 7. Members shall take reasonable steps to inform themselves, their clients or employers of the economic, social, environmental or legal consequences which may arise from their actions; and
Surveyors shall consider the larger benefits and costs of their work outside the narrow limits of some transaction or task, both to future landowners, adjoining landowners, and other surveyors.
> 8. Members shall inform their clients or employers of any interest which may be, or may be perceived as being, in conflict with their interests, or which may affect the quality of service or impartial judgement
Dual roles are inherently problematic and should be avoided when providing a service to a client. While in theory, as long as the client is aware of the dual role and consents, this is permissible, in practice it is nearly always unsatisfactory.
Perhaps this is just one of the reasons that ACSM is no more.
NSPS took over that organization and has its own code of ethics.
With the dissolution of ACSM, this code is no longer in effect.
Read Kent's post ...
about in the middle. His initial post had nothing to do with the American Congress on Surveying & Mapping.
Um...yes it is..
And I belong to it....
The board's minutes provide considerable insight, and great entertainment, into the Dont's of professional surveying. I'm guessing by process of elimination...
Kent.... and that is why I am not a member DU.....
RADU
Kent.... and that is why I am not a member DU.....
Richard, it's a given that land surveyors, being predominantly intuitive thinking types, will dislike overly specific rules that may not apply to all situations. However, the sort of vague ethical statements that regard surveying practice from a level 10km above the ground are just as wrong, I think, and the fact that technical rules are seen as something separate and apart from professional ethics is diagnostic.
The real problem is that the ethical principles have apparently not been sufficiently well stated to be reducible to definite rules. The whole idea that land surveying is a profession organized to provide a boundless good to society with no mention of proportionate reciprocal compensation is just weirdly detached from the reality of professional practice.
And why is it that any reprimand or penalty isn't reflected on the license status ?
If you view different types of licenses of the state board they do reflect past board penalties. Do other states not list past transgressions or is it just our state?
Some of the cases you wish you could read more details of.
