For instance, it would be unethical for a tecaher to sleep with a pupil, and I imagine there's a similar edict with doctors. The MP and the constituent are both single (separated), although the MP is still married. They met when the constituent went to the MP's surgery, so the MP has met the constituent "through the job", but the issue that caused the constituent to go to the surgery has been resolved, so there's no actual conflict of interest there. You'll appreciate that I can't reveal the name of the MP, but apart from that I can supply further details if necessary for your judgement.
2006-12-14
21:59:42
·
8 answers
·
asked by
White_Clothes_Scare_Me
2
in
Politics & Government
➔ Law & Ethics
With regard to the MP being married, their spouse left them quite a while ago. Thus the separation wasn't the MP's decision, although I suppose fault is a harder issue to judge. The relationship with the constituent started a reasonable time after the separation. I'm not saying that this removes the issue of whether the 'adultery' is ethical, but it was the "abuse of responsibility" angle that I wanted judgement on.
2006-12-14
22:18:20 ·
update #1