Professional Ethics

Programming is a growing field and is starting to have impacts on everyone’s life. In the Article “The Code I’m Still Ashamed Of” the author Bill Sourour talks of how he created and programmed a code. This code was one that he feels ashamed of and that he wishes he could take back. It was during his time working as a programmer for a marketing company with clients in the pharmaceutical world. The code he wrote was for a website in which there was a quiz aimed at specifically teenage girls. He wrote the code using the requirements from the company and he regrets not speaking up earlier. He programmed the code along with the questions and it all lead to the advertised drug that was being promoted. One of the main side effects of that drug was severe depression which led a young girl to commit suicide. In this Case Analysis I will argue that Deontology shows us that the code was morally problematic because it did not follow moral duties when it comes to programming, and that Sourour should have done the programming differently because programming is apart of everyone’s lives and programmers have to be the last line of ethical defense for users.

Code of Ethics is generally just a guide of principles designed to help professionals conduct business honestly and with integrity. When it comes to technology and the code of ethics for technology companies or professionals there are three which are IEEE, ACM, and NSPE. ACM deals with Computing Machinery, IEEE deals with the advancement of technology for humanity, and NSPE deals with ethical proceeding with engineers. The general concept of ACM code of ethics is to benefits society while also not harming the company. IEEE general concept would be treating people respectfully and fairly and do not cause harm to anyone. Finally, NSPE general concepts would be protecting the health and safety while being objective.

All of them have the same general rule which is ensuring the health, welfare, and safety of the public. When it comes to IEEE their code of ethics does not implement anything saying they will use their own sense of mind when it comes to ethical standards. In other words comparing it to the case of Sourour they would do the same thing he did at the beginning and just do the job while not thinking of how it could impact the lives of people and the possible outcomes of side effects. Next, looking at NSPE they say the same as IEEE in the general sense but when you compare it to the case of Sourour their overall concepts of their code of ethics shows they would be objective and have no personal feelings in the matter and only do their job as they state they would “Issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner”. Lastly comparing ACM with the case of Sourour their code of ethics seems as though they will stand up and think of the repercussions of what could happen and how to alter or prevent it from being unethical in any way.

The selected ethical tool of Deontology relating to the case of Sourour is very simple. When it comes to Deontology the overall concept is that morality is following moral laws that consist of moral duties. Basically, you follow overall moral rules that are universally correct or okay. Analyzing the case of Sourour using the tool of Deontology says that Sourour was not morally right. He did not use the universal moral rules which are basically promote respect, healthy relationship, protection, etc. The code of ethics is an overall example of Deontology moral rules. Sourour was not using the ethical universal rules of speaking up when something seems wrong. In my opinion I believe that Sourour should have spoken up when he got the requirements for the project. Being an ethical programmer is helping promote ethical standards in every way and not just following simple procedures. Just following simple procedures does not show that you care and are the last line of defense instead it shows that you are just doing your job and not caring how the outcomes can be as Sourour did. It is going above and beyond in making sure that every proceeding and step has no setbacks or downfalls and making sure that it is ethical in every way. 

Mary Beth Armstrong was a professor of accounting at Cal Poly State and was the recipient of the American Accounting Associations Accounting Exemplar award. In Armstrong’s article of Confidentiality her main concepts focus on confidentiality and the trust and autonomy that goes into it. She is basically saying that to keep professional secrets and confidence in the public interest there must be trust and autonomy. In the article she talks of prima facie. In a nutshell when it comes to confidentiality prima facie states that it is morally required by professionals unless overridden by other bigger important duties. If the confidentiality is broken then a principle is implemented to making sure there is no harm being cause and any harm is prevented. In the last bit Armstrong talks of deciding when to breach confidentiality as a professional. When it comes to breach confidentiality as a professional one must think of the amount of harm and the probability of the harm that could be caused.

Using Armstrong’s article to analyze the case of Sourour comes to a realization of how Sourour could have processed what happened. Armstrong’s main concept deals around confidentiality. Sourour is a professional programmer and in turn with his clients has to be professional and exercise confidentiality. The requirements that the client put forward for the program and the questions sparked something in Sourours mind and how it could be bad. However, as professional programmer he deemed it as being confidential and professional and keeping it to himself while also finishing the task with no questions.

With Deontology when used with Armstrong’s article it is a universal rule that you must protect the autonomy of the client. So, using this as a reference we can look at Sourours case and how this could have impacted his thought process. Sourour could have thought that should he expose his client he would be unprofessional and bring harm to them and their business. As such he did not bring up how the questions seemed overly targeting teenage girls and how no side effects were mentioned. This was a dead giveaway to Sourour and how things might seem bad. This also gives another outlook into how it could be seen through his eyes and what he could have thought of the situation when doing the assigned task.

In my opinion using Armstrong’s article about confidentiality that Sourour might have been wrong in how he handled the situation and what he should have done, but his thought process of it might not have been that off. He thought of the probability of it becoming major and damaging his client and the work relationship between him and his client, so he said nothing. Using Deontology in their universal moral rules and duties he is not wrong when relating it to this article. He did protect his client’s autonomy and well-being. This is a key concept in Armstrong’s article and makes me believe that, when it relates to the article, that he is in the right and did not mess up.

In the case of Sourour he feels that the code he regrets the code he wrote for the company he worked for because of the things that led up to a tragic outcome. He feels responsible for it and as a programmer believes he should be held accountable as he is supposed to be an ethical last stand of defense to help prevent things like that happening. These type of cases happen a lot with many different business and are unfortunately covered up and swept under the rug. The implications on these types of cases show that big businesses cover it up and are only here to profit and not uphold good moral/ethical standards. The wider implications when it involves this type of case is that people are losing their lives from this type of misinformation or greedy money hungry type of promotion. The moral code of ethics is not upheld to above their said functions.