Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations cowski on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Standard of Care 6
- Thread starter TreesMan
- Start date
-
1
- #2
According to ASFE the definition is:
-The standard of care is the ordinary skill and competence exercised by members of a profession is good standing in the community at the time of the event creating the cause of action.
The standard of care is quite difficult to define for a specific situation because you have to know how "everybody else" in the specific community did the work at the time it was done.
-The standard of care is the ordinary skill and competence exercised by members of a profession is good standing in the community at the time of the event creating the cause of action.
The standard of care is quite difficult to define for a specific situation because you have to know how "everybody else" in the specific community did the work at the time it was done.
Senselessticker
Electrical
I've never heard of a "standard of care" concerning engineering. Standard of Care - "medically speaking" refers to standard of care that a trauma/medical emergency patient should receive from a rescuer until more advanced EMS arrives (ambulance). Once on the ambulance, a new “standard of care” is in order based on training and protocol until the patient arrives at the hospital. Once at the hospital, a new standard of care is in affect. Not meeting the “standard of care” for a particular protocol can result in serious lawsuits. My knowledge is based on my experience as a whitewater rafting guide and ski patroller carrying First Responder and Outdoor Emergency Care certifications.
-
1
- #4
"Standard of Care" is a legal term.
In the law of negligence, the degree of care which a reasonable, prudent or careful person should exercise under the same or similar circumstances. If the standard falls below that established by law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm, the person may be liable for damages resulting from such conduct.
Ref:
In the law of negligence, the degree of care which a reasonable, prudent or careful person should exercise under the same or similar circumstances. If the standard falls below that established by law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm, the person may be liable for damages resulting from such conduct.
Ref:
-
1
- #5
I guess weakness of that definition would be, what is the standard, established by law, for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm? And what is reasonable harm?
Is there a "Standard of Care" in any of the Engineering legislation in any of the states/provinces/jurisdictions that people have seen? Are those definitions written anywhere?
"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
Is there a "Standard of Care" in any of the Engineering legislation in any of the states/provinces/jurisdictions that people have seen? Are those definitions written anywhere?
"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
That is what I mean.
I did a search in my association's web site, and got zero hits for "Standard of Care".
I guess that is why TreesMan posted this.
"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
I did a search in my association's web site, and got zero hits for "Standard of Care".
I guess that is why TreesMan posted this.
"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
-
1
- #8
In addition to the definition in the above article, a recent seminar I attended further defined the "Standard of Care" to restrict it to the specific geographic region. That is, what a reasonable and prudent professional in the same region would do under the same circumstances. Does that mean there could be a different standard of care in Texas vs. that in Wisconsin? NY vs. CA?
rholder98:
My interpretation is that the Standard of Care is not only restricted to a specific state, but even goes to the point of being a specific region of a state or even a specific city.
Since I am most familiar with geotechnical engineering and the state of Michigan, I will use that as an example. I have worked throughout the state. What is normal practice in Detroit is far different from normal practice in Grand Rapids. It may be more pronounced for geotechnical engineering since soil conditions can vary significantly from region to region, but I think the same idea could apply to other areas of engineering.
Pavement engineering, for instance, can vary considerably from one state to the next. What is standard practice in Michigan is not at all used in Indiana.
My interpretation is that the Standard of Care is not only restricted to a specific state, but even goes to the point of being a specific region of a state or even a specific city.
Since I am most familiar with geotechnical engineering and the state of Michigan, I will use that as an example. I have worked throughout the state. What is normal practice in Detroit is far different from normal practice in Grand Rapids. It may be more pronounced for geotechnical engineering since soil conditions can vary significantly from region to region, but I think the same idea could apply to other areas of engineering.
Pavement engineering, for instance, can vary considerably from one state to the next. What is standard practice in Michigan is not at all used in Indiana.
dbuzz,
I think of it this way.
If an engineer owes a "duty of care", that duty needs to be discharged by providing, as a minimum, care that meets a "standard of care", as defined by ... and herein lies the problem. What is the "standard of care" and how is it defined/proven.
JAE's link is Part I, what is the definition/concept of standard of care. I would love to see Part II, "... how proof of compliance with the standard of care is presented at trial."
eric, rholder:
It is interesting that the "standard of care" is defined to vary geographically, from California to Texas to Maine. Does this imply that some "people" are worth more than others?
Standard practice has to vary. Standard practice is not the same as "standard of care". For example, -55°C is not a problem in LA, it is in Anchorage. Hence, standard of practice is different.
Doing the job right, this is "standard of care". And I would think that you need to do the job right as much in Anchorage as in LA?
"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
I think of it this way.
If an engineer owes a "duty of care", that duty needs to be discharged by providing, as a minimum, care that meets a "standard of care", as defined by ... and herein lies the problem. What is the "standard of care" and how is it defined/proven.
JAE's link is Part I, what is the definition/concept of standard of care. I would love to see Part II, "... how proof of compliance with the standard of care is presented at trial."
eric, rholder:
It is interesting that the "standard of care" is defined to vary geographically, from California to Texas to Maine. Does this imply that some "people" are worth more than others?
Standard practice has to vary. Standard practice is not the same as "standard of care". For example, -55°C is not a problem in LA, it is in Anchorage. Hence, standard of practice is different.
Doing the job right, this is "standard of care". And I would think that you need to do the job right as much in Anchorage as in LA?
"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
Senselessticker
Electrical
Folks...we are trying to compare apples and oranges.
"Standard of Care" traditionally refers to the care a person or group of people should recieve during a medical emergency or trauma situation. Whyun is right...it is simply a legal term.
There can be no standard of "care" within engineering simply beause there is no hierarchy of "care" to be given or governing authority for the way engineering is performed. There are mutliple paths to an AHJ or regulating authority, however these paths are not governed, nor parrellel. Each path is based on a contract between companies. Of course...engineering standards are developed and implented into design, management, construction, etc...then often times audited accordingly, but "Care" doesn't fit into the engineering puzzle.
"Standard of Care" traditionally refers to the care a person or group of people should recieve during a medical emergency or trauma situation. Whyun is right...it is simply a legal term.
There can be no standard of "care" within engineering simply beause there is no hierarchy of "care" to be given or governing authority for the way engineering is performed. There are mutliple paths to an AHJ or regulating authority, however these paths are not governed, nor parrellel. Each path is based on a contract between companies. Of course...engineering standards are developed and implented into design, management, construction, etc...then often times audited accordingly, but "Care" doesn't fit into the engineering puzzle.
Standard of care will be established by testimonies of expert witnesses who will "represent" the "reasonable professional". Of course, the bar that is established by the expert witness can be raised or lowered by the jury in the final verdict.
Legally, engineers have "duty of care" for the public or their client and must exercise "standard of care" when performing their work. When standard of care has not been met, it constitutes negligence and he is liable to whomever receiving harm from that negligence.
Legally, engineers have "duty of care" for the public or their client and must exercise "standard of care" when performing their work. When standard of care has not been met, it constitutes negligence and he is liable to whomever receiving harm from that negligence.
- Thread starter
- #15
Thank you all for your great inputs!! Just as I suspected, it's incredibly difficult to define the standard of care... it varies from state to state and within states. I asked another engineer the same question once and he said... standard of care is what a judge or jury wants it to be on any given day. So... it varies from day to day as well. A major problem I see is that... it appear states and jurisdictions can not quantify the term... which for engineers that rely on "measurability"... it goes against our nature and logic. There will always be someone with higher standards and someone with lower standards. Thus, to establish a standard of care acceptable to the lay person is very difficult. The fallout is.. we either "over-engineer" or "under-engineer" our structures... never to make more than one person happy at a time.
Thanx again for your comments, and please keep them coming.
Thanx again for your comments, and please keep them coming.
the standard of care that an engineer must meet will be determined by what other reasonalbly prudent engineers with the same amount of education, training, and experience, in that particular field (and yes, possibly that geographic region), acting reasonably would have done in a similar situation...
basically, if another "reasonable engineer" would not have made the same mistake in the situation you may be liable for negligence.
For negligence you need:
1. To establish you owed a duty of care
(easy to make out that an engineer owes a duty to protect the public)
2. To establish that the engineer is in dereliction of the duty
3. To establish that damages (not necessarily physical or pecuniary) have resulted.
beyond this there is causation and other legal issues to be proven - all elements to be proven on a balance of probabilities.
basically, if another "reasonable engineer" would not have made the same mistake in the situation you may be liable for negligence.
For negligence you need:
1. To establish you owed a duty of care
(easy to make out that an engineer owes a duty to protect the public)
2. To establish that the engineer is in dereliction of the duty
3. To establish that damages (not necessarily physical or pecuniary) have resulted.
beyond this there is causation and other legal issues to be proven - all elements to be proven on a balance of probabilities.
-
1
- #18
GregLocock
Automotive
Nope. If a company employs an inexperienced engineer then it is not judged by what an equivalently inexperienced engineer would have done, but what an APPROPRIATELY experienced engineer would have done. If the inexperienced engineer is out of his depth then he should call for help. That is what an ethical professional does.
Cheers
Greg Locock
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
Cheers
Greg Locock
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
There is a minimum standard that is applicable Greg. It's the P.Eng standard in Canada or PE in the states.
What I meant was if you are a P.Eng with 20 years of design experience, and a Ph.D in the specific subject you may be held to a higher standard than a brand new P.Eng, even it he is acting within his field or discipline.
What you said is correct though. It's analogous to a Family Physician knowing when he is out of his depth and must refer.
A family physician diagnosing a rare disease will not be held to the same standard as an infectious disease specialist. That is the point I was trying to make.
What I meant was if you are a P.Eng with 20 years of design experience, and a Ph.D in the specific subject you may be held to a higher standard than a brand new P.Eng, even it he is acting within his field or discipline.
What you said is correct though. It's analogous to a Family Physician knowing when he is out of his depth and must refer.
A family physician diagnosing a rare disease will not be held to the same standard as an infectious disease specialist. That is the point I was trying to make.
-
1
- #20
I was shocked to see someone state that he had never heard of a standard of care for engineers! Better learn it before the opposing attorney beats you to death with it.
Here's my working definition of our standard of care:
"that level of service ordinarily provided by other competent members of our profession, providing similar services in the same locale and under the same or
similar circumstances"
If you would like a bit more info on this subject, go to and read the course booklet for "Every Word Counts! Contract Mechanisms and Their Review". You can download the booklet (a pdf file) free.
Here's my working definition of our standard of care:
"that level of service ordinarily provided by other competent members of our profession, providing similar services in the same locale and under the same or
similar circumstances"
If you would like a bit more info on this subject, go to and read the course booklet for "Every Word Counts! Contract Mechanisms and Their Review". You can download the booklet (a pdf file) free.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question