Talk:Professional responsibility

Law Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Ethics Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Ethics

Untitled[edit]

This article makes it appear that professional responsibility is something that applies only to the legal profession and not to other professions. Usually things like that happen because the author of the article had his head somewhat in the sand. Michael Hardy 14:32, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Professional responsibility is a term of art commonly used by lawyers in the United States to refer to the area of law that ensures that lawyers act in an ethical fashion. Very few other professions are under such a strict legal mandate to act ethically, or have similar mandatory ethics education requirements. In the United States, engineers and computer programmers do not have to take a standardized nationwide ethics exam like lawyers (I'm referring to the MPRE). Furthermore, different terms are used for ethics in different fields. Medicine is covered by bioethics, for example. --Coolcaesar 07:18, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It may be a term of art within the legal profession, but it law is not the only profession for which it is a term of art. DCDuring 14:52, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well. Can you name any other profession that specifically uses it as a term of art? --Coolcaesar 01:38, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Architecture, tax practicioners are two I remember off the top of my head. Google will reveal a few more. There is not doubt that lawyers have more references than anyone else. But this is not just for lawyers. It's more of a long-term issue anyway. The entire area of abuse of professional position relative to clients, sometimes even to the extent of human rights abuses (usually the result of a government desiring to borrow a little legitimacy for its repression) is an important issue, not well covered in WP. That's what I was looking for. Professional ethics has a fairly good stab at an article. It's too bad that the psychiatric professional abuse topic is so heated due to Scientology's interest. BTW, you wouldn't be a NY litigator, would you? DCDuring 01:57, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to agree. This article seems a little too heavily weighted toward lawyers when there are other professions subject to a code of professional responsibility. Perhaps this should be a bit better explained in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tulsa si elagnewg (talk • contribs) 06:46, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A positioning for this article[edit]

Here are some propositions that I offer to help this article evolve productively for WP.

Ultimately this topic would have to include more than lawyers, beyond doubt.
Lawyers have far and away the most articulate and generally the best developed treatment of the issue among the professions.
Some of the principles of professional responsibility apply to all professions.

These propositions lead me to believe that a good professional responsibility article covering all professions will necessarily consist substantially of material derived from the legal profession. Three issues come to mind:

Where should material peculiar to the legal profession go (eventually)?
How should the lead be worded to allow all professions to benefit and be included?
How should the articles headings be structured? DCDuring 02:32, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 04:23, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Professionalism is not exclusive to lawyers[edit]

Engineers, doctors, accountants, architects, and others also have the same kind of professional obligations - to avoid conflicts of interest and practice due diligence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.17.26.75 (talk) 19:34, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Professionalism is not exclusive to lawyers" - Absolutely agree!

The whole health industry has huge responsibilities, and pyramidic responsibility structures (closely linked to rates of pay). Even nursing assistants and care assistants are expected to act responsibily. And they have more contact with the recipient of services so in some ways they feel the responsibility more than the remote senior staff.

Does WIkipedia have a moral sense of fairness that means this article should reflect all professions and explore the responsibilty pyramid... and other issues? DS0022 (talk) 18:05, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading link[edit]

The paragraph: "In a modern context, professional responsibility encompasses an array of the personal, corporate, and humanitarian standards of behaviour, as expected by clients, fellow professionals, and professional bodies." is a bit misleading. Rather than 'professional bodies' the link goes to 'professional associations'. In my understanding associations are only one type of professional body: training establishments are another, and regulators are even more important. I suggest the paragraph should say 'professional associations' if that's what it means, otherwise define 'bodies' more clearly. DS0022 (talk) 18:10, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]