1 Ethics in the Workplace: Case Study 4 Analysis Group Members: 1. Ryan Nii Akwei Brown (11357610) 2. Anti Bright Gyeadu (11340436) 3. Adjei-Gyebi Minta Okatakyie (11040586) 4. Mensah Lartey Isaiah Nii Larte (11222100) 5. Thomas Tetteh Lartey (11223578) 6. Yussif Mutawakil (11252675) 7. Russell Morkeh Blay (11288670) 8. Boateng Cyril Konadu (11124483) 9. Angela Acquah (11033579) 10. Johnson Junior Kreponi (11205898) DCIT 401: SOCIAL, LEGAL, ETHICAL AND PROFESSIONAL ISSUES Department Of Computer Science, University of Ghana March 2026. Abstract 2 This report analyses the ethical and legal dilemmas presented in Case Study 4 of the DCIT 401 curriculum. The case involves a software engineer who discovers a rare but potentially fatal flaw in a medical system that management refuses to fix immediately. By evaluating the stakeholders, the distinction between legal compliance and ethical duty, the shift in organisational power caused by technical expertise, and the necessity of informed consent, this report argues that public safety must supersede corporate loyalty. The analysis concludes that the software engineer has a moral obligation to act as a whistleblower to protect patients and uphold the core principles of professional computing ethics. 1.0 Introduction: Defining Ethics in the Workplace Ethics in the workplace refers to the moral rules that guide how employees and managers behave. In the technology sector, these ethics go beyond just following company policies or avoiding legal trouble. They involve a strong commitment to public safety and professional honesty. A true ethical workplace requires employees to speak up when something is wrong. When a company cares more about saving money than protecting lives, a major ethical conflict happens. As software engineers, our primary duty is to the public. We will demonstrate how this principle applies by analysing our assigned case study below. 2.0 Identification of Stakeholders To properly analyse this case, we must identify everyone affected by the decision. We have assigned a weight to each stakeholder to show how much their voice should matter in the final decision. 3 ● Patients (85%): The patients carry the most weight because their physical well-being and lives are directly at risk. A financial loss can be recovered. A lost life cannot. Their safety must be the absolute priority. ● Software Engineer (5%): The engineer faces the moral burden. They have the technical knowledge and must choose between job security and public safety. ● Management and Company (5%): The company is concerned with financial stability, project deadlines, and public reputation. They hold the financial risk. ● Healthcare Providers and Doctors (3%): Doctors rely on the medical system to do no harm. If the system fails, their medical licenses and reputations are at stake. ● Regulatory Bodies (2%): Agencies like the Ghana Food and Drugs Authority ensure medical devices are safe for public use. They represent the law. 3.0 Legal Versus Ethical Distinction There is often a wide gap between what is legally acceptable and what is ethically right. 3.1 The Facts The company wants to delay a software fix to save money. This action knowingly risks human lives. 3.2 International and Homeland Laws Internationally, medical software is highly regulated by standards like ISO 13485 for medical devices. In Ghana, the Public Health Act of 2012 regulates the safety of medical devices and public health. 4 3.3 Legal Acceptability Legally, management might argue that the flaw is rare and unproven. They might try to use this ambiguity to delay a costly recall without breaking a specific written law immediately. 3.4 Ethical Unacceptability Ethically, hiding a known fatal flaw is completely unacceptable. It violates the core medical principle to do no harm. It also violates the ACM Code of Ethics. This code states that computing professionals must contribute to society and human well-being. 3.5 Company Values A respected institution or company should hold integrity above daily policies. True integrity means doing the right thing even when it causes the company financial loss. Therefore, the engineer must prioritise public safety over company loyalty. 4.0 Technology and Its Impact on Power In a normal workplace, the administration holds all the power. They control the budget, the schedules, and the management of employees. However, technology changes this dynamic. The software engineer who discovers the vulnerability suddenly wields immense power. Only the engineer knows the code and the hidden danger. No one else sees that specific moment of discovery. Yet, the decision the engineer makes in that quiet moment will affect the lives of many people. The engineer holds expert power and must decide whether to use it to protect the patients or protect the company's profits. 5 5.0 Discussion of Consent Consent is a major ethical requirement in medicine and technology. 5.1 Awareness Patients are not forced into any form of treatment by law. To give valid consent, patients must be made aware of the system, its benefits, its flaws, and other available options. Doctors must also be fully aware of how the system works. In this case study, management is hiding the flaw. Therefore, any consent given by a patient or doctor is built on a lie. It is not informed consent. 5.2 Incapacitated Patients If a patient is unconscious, doctors might need to act quickly. Waiting for a guardian could lead to a timeout and death. The doctor uses the medical system under implied consent to save a life. But if the doctor does not know the system is flawed, the trust is broken. 5.3 Summary Scenario Imagine a patient is treated with the flawed system. The patient survives and thanks the hospital. Five years later, the patient starts experiencing severe side effects directly caused by the hidden software flaw. What happens now? Because the company hid the truth, the original treatment was done without true consent. The company is now ethically responsible for the long-term damage to that human life. 6 6.0 Conclusion: Defending the Case Study Our group concludes that the software engineer must not remain loyal to the company in this situation. Remaining silent makes the engineer an accomplice to potential harm. Based on the heavy weight of patient safety, the ethical requirement of informed consent, and the ACM Code of Ethics, the engineer must protect the public. The engineer must report the flaw to regulatory bodies if management refuses to act. This is known as whistleblowing. It is the only ethical choice in this workplace scenario. References Association for Computing Machinery. (2018). ACM code of ethics and professional conduct . https://www.acm.org/code-of-ethics Baase, S. (2012). A gift of fire: Social, legal, and ethical issues for computing technology (4th ed.). Pearson. Parliament of the Republic of Ghana. (2012). Public Health Act, 2012 (Act 851) https://www.moh.gov.gh/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Public-Health-Act-851.pdf