Print this page The Molasses Flood of 1919 and Other Ethical Failures in Engineering
Mark P. Rossow, PhD, PE Retired
Course Outline
This two-hour online course begins with a discussion of the legal definition of “negligence” and the closely related notion of the “standard of care” expected of an engineer. Because the occurrence of serious accidents always raises questions of whether adequate safety precautions had been taken, the relation between safety and risk is discussed. Similarly, since a serious accident usually results in a failure investigation, the biases often inherent in such an investigation are described, as are the use and misuse of investigation reports by persons who differ widely in their motives. Finally these concepts are illustrated with a description of the Great Boston Molasses Flood of 1919, and four additional case studies.
This course includes a multiple-choice quiz at the end, which is designed to enhance the understanding of the course materials.
Learning Objective
This course teaches the following specific knowledge and skills:
- Definition of negligence and standard of care;
- Relation of safety and risk;
- Knightian uncertainty;
- Retrospective fallacy in accident investigations;
- Myth of perfect engineering practice in accident investigations;
- Uses and misuses of the results of failure investigations;
- Negative effects of punishment on learning from accidents; and
- General causes of engineering failures.
Intended Audience
This course is intended for engineers concerned with ethical behavior in engineering practice.
Benefit to Attendees
A person completing this course will be familiar with and able to distinguish negligence in engineering practice.
Course Introduction
Consider the following situation. An engineering firm designs a device, the device subsequently fails, and as a result several people are injured or killed. This situation clearly involves an engineering failure—the device did not do what it was supposed to do—but was the engineer negligent in his duties to protect the public? Deciding if an engineer has been negligent can be difficult.
Course Content
This course is based on the paper, “The Molasses Flood of 1919 and Other Ethical Failures in Engineering,” written by Mark P. Rossow, July, 2015.
The Molasses Flood of 1919 and Other Ethical Failures in Engineering
Please click on
the above underlined hypertext to view, download or print the document for your
study. Because of the large file size, we recommend that you first save the
file to your computer by right clicking the mouse and choosing "Save Target
As ...", and then open the file in Adobe Acrobat Reader. If you still experience
any difficulty in downloading or opening this file, you may need to close some
applications or reboot your computer to free up some memory.
You may need to download Acrobat Reader to view and print the document.
Course Summary
Negligence in engineering can be recognized if the standard of care followed by a prudent engineer can be defined. Notions of safety, risk, investigation bias, punishment and blame all may influence what observers of an engineering failure choose to define as negligence.
Related Links
For additional technical information related to this subject, please visit the following websites or web pages:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/negligence
http://www.asce.com/code_of_ethics/
Quiz
Once you finish studying the above course content, you need to take a quiz to obtain the PDH credits.
DISCLAIMER: The materials contained in the online course are not intended as a representation or warranty on the part of PDH Center or any other person/organization named herein. The materials are for general information only. They are not a substitute for competent professional advice. Application of this information to a specific project should be reviewed by a registered architect and/or professional engineer/surveyor. Anyone making use of the information set forth herein does so at their own risk and assumes any and all resulting liability arising therefrom.
