What must an engineer demonstrate in their defense if a product they've designed fails?

In the context of engineering ethics and responsibilities, if a product designed by an engineer fails, the engineer must demonstrate that they followed a normal standard of care in their design and execution. This means that the engineer adhered to established industry standards, best practices, and the level of skill and diligence that is generally expected from competent professionals in their field.

Demonstrating that the standard of care was met indicates that the engineer took reasonable precautions to ensure safety, reliability, and functionality in their design. This defense is crucial because it reflects an engineer's commitment to ethical practices and due diligence, which are inherent in the profession. By showcasing that they acted within the accepted norms, the engineer can provide a basis for their actions and decisions, which can mitigate liability in the event of a product failure.

The other options do not represent a viable defense in this context. For example, stating that all designs must be perfect sets an unrealistic expectation that is not aligned with the nature of engineering, where risk and uncertainty are always factors. High compensation for damages reflects the consequences rather than a defense of the engineer’s actions. Similarly, while public safety audits are important, they do not specifically demonstrate the engineer's adherence to the standard of care in the design process itself.