of Ethics Online Collection: 1991
Code of Professional Ethics
OBJECTIVE
The basic objective, of the Code is to specify and set forth the means to enforce the minimum ethical conduct expected of all members, as professionals, and to facilitate voluntary compliance with standards considerably higher than the required minimums. Accordingly, the Code prescribes three kinds of standards, under the headings of Canons, Rules of Professional Conduct, and Guidelines for Professional Conduct. The Canons are general goals of an aspirational and inspirational nature. They are maxims which on their merits serve as model standards of exemplary professional conduct. The Canons also express the general concepts and principles from which the more specific Rules are derived.
Unlike the Canons, the Rules are specific standards of a mandatory and enforceable nature. The Rules prescribe the absolute minimum level of conduct required of every member. Any member who violates a Rule will be exposed to the possibility of a disciplinary action.
The Guidelines are in the nature of explanatory statements designed to assist members in interpreting the Canons and Rules, understanding their rationale, and applying them to frequently encountered situations. Although the official Code of Professional Ethics consists of the collective of all Canons, Rules and Guidelines which have been approved by the Board of Directors, in the absence of a Rule violation, violations of Canons and/or Guidelines will not constitute sufficient grounds for a disciplinary action. However, in applying the Rules and interpreting them uniformly, the Ethics Committee will refer to the general principles and concepts embodied in the
Canons and Guidelines, to applicable published rulings in previous cases brought before the Committee, and to relevant published opinions of the Ethics Committee (when available).
CANON I
MEMBERS SHOULD ENDEAVOR AS PROFESSIONALS TO PLACE THE PUBLIC ABOVE THEIR OWN.
RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT:
R1.1 A member has a duty to understand and abide by all Rules of Professional Conduct which are prescribed in the Code of Professional Ethics of the Association.
R1.2 A member shall not directly or indirectly condone any act which the member is prohibited from performing by the Rules of this Code.
GUIDELINES FOR PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT:
G1.1 By stipulating at the outset that "Members Should Endeavor As Professionals to Place the Public Interest Above Their Own," Canon I serves as the fundamental goal of the entire Code of Professional Ethics. The other Code standards are essentially attempts to define the "public interest" (and, hence, the ethical obligations of members) in more specific terms. Accordingly, the overall format and rationale of the Code are best understood by reading Canon 1, next asking the question "how?", and then reading the first two rules. That is to say, how do members go about endeavoring to place the public interest above their own? Answer: at a minimum, by understanding and obeying all the Rules in -the Code and then, beyond the expected minimums, by striving to meet the more lofty standards expressed in the various Canons and Guidelines.
The aspirational goal of Canon 1 is more easily expressed than achieved. Nonetheless, while no profession ultimately can make good the claim that all of its members are forever guided by an attitude of altruism and a spirit of unselfish devotion to the needs of others, a formal commitment to altruism is probably the single most important characteristic which distinguishes the true professional from the mere merchant.
G1.2 The ethical obligation to place the public interest above personal interests extends to every member, regardless of whether the member's occupational position requires direct contact with actual or prospective clients. As used throughout this Code, the term "client" refers broadly to any individual, business firm, governmental body, educational institution or other entity that engages the professional advice or services of a member, as an independent professional and not as a common law employee of the client.
G1.3 A member should avoid even the appearance of impropriety. When there is good reason why a member should be uncertain to the ethical propriety of a specific activity or type of conduct, that member should refrain from engaging in such activity or conduct. A member in need of interpretative assistance may request an advisory opinion from the Ethics Committee-of the Association.
G1.4 In the performance of professional services, a member should generally act in a manner that will best serve the member's own professional interests in the long run . This Guideline, when taken along with the other provisions of the Code, should pose no insurmountable problems of priority in the context of most everyday situations, since the best long-run professional interests of a member ordinarily do not conflict either with the public interest or with other specific interests. Yet, potential conflicts of interest may arise, or appear to arise, because many members simultaneously serve two or more "masters'' in a literal sense of that term, and such members must somehow balance the various interests with their own personal interests and the best interests of the general public. For example, a member who is employed by a corporation may serve an immediate superior, the corporation, its stockholders and its clients.
Strict compliance with all the Rules of this Code, including R1.2, should enable the member to resolve such potential conflicts of interest. However, it should be acknowledged that a significant number of Association members are subject not only to this Code, but also to one or more of the ethics codes which are applicable to attorneys, CPA's, CFP's, CFC's, or other financial planning professionals. In drafting this Code, a concerted effort has been made to avoid any enforceable Rules that would tend to conflict with the existing and enforceable rules of other codes to which a member may be ethically bound. If such a conflict does arise, the member is expected to exercise his or her best professional judgment. No disciplinary penalty will be imposed upon a member who violates a Rule of this Code if the member did so, in good faith, in order to comply with an enforceable rule of another ethics code to which the member is subject.
CANON 2
MEMBERS SHOULD SEEK CONTINUALLY TO MAINTAIN AND IMPROVE THEIR PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, AND COMPETENCE.
R2.1 A member shall keep informed on all matters that are essential to the maintenance of the member's professional competence in the area in which he/she specializes and/or claims expertise.
GUIDELINES FOR PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT:
G2.1 Every member has an ethical obligation to engage actively and continuously in appropriate educational activities. Knowledge and skills alone do not assure that their possessor will observe high ethical standards, but knowledge and skills are requisites to the high levels of competence and performance rightfully expected of all professionals, and the maintenance of knowledge and skills requires a commitment to continuing educational. A continuing education commitment is especially necessary for individuals in the field of financial planning, which is characterized by its inherent complexity and by the dynamic changes in the economic, legal and social environment within which it operates. Thus, to the extent that a member purports to be a professional and yet does not maintain high levels of competence and performance, such a member engages in unethical conduct which is in the nature of a misrepresentation.
G2.2 At a minimum, as specified in R2.1, all members are obligated to keep informed on "technical matters that are essential to the maintenance of the member's professional competence in the field of financial planning." Since this particular Rule applies to to all members of the Association, the Rule does not attempt to prescribe the specific matters that are "essential" to the maintenance of competence in each of the numerous specialities comprising the total membership. Instead, it is left to the judgment of each member to decide, in the light of his or her occupational position, the content and form of the continuing education that will satisfy the minimum ethical obligation under
CANON 3
MEMBERS SHOULD OBEY ALL LAWS AND REGULATIONS, AND SHOULD AVOID ANY CONDUCT OR ACTIVITY WHICH WOULD CAUSE UNJUST HARM TO OTHERS.
RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT:
R3.1 A member will be subject to disciplinary action for the violation of any law or regulation, to the extent that such violation suggests the likelihood of professional misconduct.
R3.2 A member shall not allow the pursuit of financial gain or other personal benefit to interfere with the exercise of sound professional judgment and skills.
R3.3 In the conduct of business or professional activities, a member shall not engage in any act or omission of a dishonest, deceitful, or fraudulent nature.
GUIDELINES FOR PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT:
G3.1 A member should know, understand and comply with the laws and regulations which govern the member's business or professional activities. When in doubt as to the legality of a particular kind of conduct or activity, the member should refrain from engaging in such conduct or activity. A member should not hesitate to seek interpretative assistance from legal counsel and/or the appropriate regulatory official(s).
The Association does not condone violations of any of the laws and regulations governing citizens in a civilized society. Indeed, Canon 3 reminds members that they "should obey all laws and regulations." However, the Committee decided to confine the enforceable Rules of this Code to matters of business or professional conduct, since it was felt that enforcing standards of personal conduct and morality lie outside the Association's proper role. But drawing an appropriate dividing line between professional and personal conduct is no easy task. Should a member be disciplined by the Association for obtaining a parking or speeding ticket? For violating drug laws? For alcoholism, child abuse, rape? For misdemeanors, nonviolent felonies or murder? However regrettable such crimes and civil law violations may be, should they subject the guilty individual to additional disciplinary action by the Association?
Rule 3.1 was formulated to read that a member "will be subject to disciplinary action for the violation of any law or regulation - - - to the extent that such violation suggests the likelihood of professional misconduct.
It does not say a member will be disciplined; it says a member will be subject to disciplinary action. The Rule thus leaves it up to the disciplinary body to decide (a) whether any disciplinary action should be taken and (b) what penalty if any, should be imposed, but it also specifies the criterion that must be used by the disciplinary body in making such judgments. The test will be whether the disciplinary body feels a particular violation is sufficient evidence that professional misconduct is likely.
A member may not plead lack of knowledge as a defense for improper conduct under Rule 3.1, unless the member can demonstrate that he or she has made a reasonable effort, in good faith, to obtain such knowledge, and it was not available.
A member should not perform professional services under terms, conditions or circumstances which would prevent or inherently impair the free and complete exercise of the member's sound professional judgment and skills. This guideline does not prohibit a member from being compensated under the terms of a legally acceptable commission arrangement, since such an arrangement, in itself, does not prevent or inherently impair the member's sound professional judgment and skills. But it does serve to remind a member so compensated of his or her ethical obligation to avoid any recommendation (to a consumer of the member's services) that would increase the member's compensation, unless such recommendation clearly meets the consumer's legitimate needs and best interests. The guideline also serves to remind every member, regardless of his or her basis of compensation, of the ethical obligation to render fully such services as are contemplated and rightfully owed under the terms of the applicable compensation arrangement.
Generally, no member should seek or accept compensation which is not for and commensurate with professional services actually rendered or to be rendered. Nor should any member seek or accept compensation under any other terms, conditions or circumstances which would violate any Canon, Rule or Guideline in this Code. However, nothing in this guideline is intended to prohibit the seeking or acceptance of gifts from family or personal friends, income from investments or income from any other activity which would neither (a) prevent or inherently impair the free and complete exercise of the member's sound professional judgment and skills nor (b) otherwise violate this Code.
In the performance of the member's own occupational function, the member should not deliberately achieve or seek to achieve, at, the expense of the uninformed, financial gains for the member, or the member's employer, which are unconscionable relative to the quantity and quality of services actually rendered.
G3.3 Some professions still have ethics rules which explicitly or effectively prohibit one member from criticizing another member or a competitor. Such provisions are often contrary to the public interest. A person may elect voluntarily to avoid direct criticism of the qualifications or conduct of another, as a matter of discretion, personal conviction or self-interest. But blanket prohibitions of criticism are unwise (and possibly illegal, to the extent that they violate antitrust notions of lessening competition, etc.). Indeed, in many cases a professional could not serve the best interests of a client without at least implying criticism of another. Suppose Planner A is now advising a client who had been previously advised by Planner B in a careless and incompetent manner. In the process of giving the client competent and thorough advice, Planner A will probably cause the client to be angry with Planner B and his stupidity, though Planner A never mentioned B by name (or maybe A did not even know that B had previously advised the client). To say that "thou shalt not knock thy competitor" would be a blatant form of protectionism for, members, not clients, and it would prevent one member from testifying against another in an ethical disciplinary hearing or a lawsuit. Futhermore, the truly ethical questions are addressed in standards such as R3.3 (dishonest, deceitful or fraudulent acts or omissions), the admonition to avoid unjust harm to others, the duty to establish and maintain honorable relationships with other professionals, and so on.
CANON 4
MEMBERS SHOULD BE DILIGENT IN THE PERFORMANCE OF THEIR OCCUPATIONAL DUTIES.
RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT:
R4.1 A member shall competently and consistently discharge the member's occupational duties, to every employer, client,* purchaser or user of the member's services, so long as those duties are consistent with what is in the client's best interests.
GUIDELINES FOR PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT:
G4.1 In the context of the diligent performance standards of this Code, the term "duties" includes, in addition to legal duties, an ethical duty to strive for extraordinary or excellent performance. And the phrase "every employer of the member's services" should be construed broadly to include a common law employer, an individual or business client, a buyer of service-related products, or any contractor of the member's occupational services. Such an "employer" has good reason to expect (from one who purports to be a true professional) both competence, if the sense of abilities, and diligent performance, in the sense of a consistent application of those abilities in a thorough and conscientious manner. Thus, to complement other Code standards which obligate a member to maintain professional competence, R4.1 stipulates that a member shall consistently discharge his or her occupational duties.
Although the Board of Directors earnestly believes that diligent performance should be an ethical obligation of all professionals, the Association will not intervene or arbitrate between the parties in an employment relationship, a contractual relationship, or a civil dispute. Nor does the Board feel that the Association's disciplinary procedures should become a substitute for legal and other remedies available to such parties. In the event of an alleged violation of R4.1, the Ethics Committee will hear the case only after all other remedies have been exhausted, and it generally will take disciplinary action only under circumstances where (a) a proven violation has caused unjust harm to another person, and the violation brings substantial discredit upon the Association; or (b) it would otherwise be in the public interest to take disciplinary action under this ethics code.
*As used throughout this Code, the term 11client" refers broadly to any individual, business firm, governmental body, educational institution or other entity that engages the professional advice or services of a member, as an independent professional and not as a common law employee of the client.
CANON 5
MEMBERS SHOULD ESTABLISH AND MAINTAIN HONORABLE RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER PROFESSIONALS, WITH THOSE WHOM THE MEMBERS SERVE IN A PROFESSIONAL CAPACITY, AND WITH ALL THOSE WHO RELY UPON THE MEMBERS' PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENTS AND SKILLS.
RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT:
R5.1 A member has a duty to know and abide by the legal limitations imposed upon the scope of the member's professional activities.
R5.2 In rendering or proposing to render a professional service for another individual or an organization, a member shall not knowingly misrepresent or conceal any material limitation on the member's ability to provide the quantity or quality of service that will adequately meet the financial planning needs of the individual or organization in question.
R5.3 In marketing or attempting to market a product to another individual or an organization, a member shall not knowingly misrepresent or conceal any material limitations on the product's ability to meet the financial planning needs of the individual or organization in question.
R5.4 A member shall not disclose to another person any confidential information entrusted to or obtained by the member in the course of the member's business or professional activities, unless a disclosure of such information is required by law or is made to a person who necessarily must have the information in order to discharge legitimate occupational or professional duties.
R5.5 In the making of oral or written recommendations to clients, a member shall (a) distinguish clearly between fact and opinion, (b) base the recommendations on sound professional evaluations of the client's present and future needs, (c) place the needs and best interests of the client above the interests of the member or the member's employer or business associates, (d) support the recommendations with appropriate research and adequate documentation of facts, and (e) scrupulously avoid any statements which are likely to mislead the client regarding the projected future results of any recommendation.
R5.6 Before rendering any professional service, a member has a duty to disclose, to a prospective client, any actual or potential conflict of interest that is or should be known by the member and is likely to impair the member's objectivity as an advisor or provider of professional services to the prospective client in question.
R5.7 In the rendering of a professional service to a client, a member has the duty to maintain the type and degree of professional independence that (a) is required of practitioners in the member's occupation or (b) is otherwise in the public interest, given the specific nature of the service being rendered.
GUIDELINES FOR PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT:
C5.1 Various statutes, administrative regulations and occupational licensing requirements impose limitations on the scope of a person's business or professional activities. Members should know-and abide by such limitations. In particular, a member should cautiously avoid engaging in, or giving the appearance of engaging in (a) the unauthorized practice of law or (b) any other practice that is not expressly authorized by law or reasonably inferred therefrom.
G5.2 While R5.1 is concerned with the legal limitations on the scope of a member's business or professional activities, R5.2 is concerned with a member's personal ability to provide (in the sense of knowledge, experience, skill and other professional qualifications) the quantity and quality of service that is needed by a client or an employer. Even if a member is legally authorized to provide the needed service, no member shall "knowingly misrepresent or conceal any material limitations on the member's ability to provide the quantity or quality of" the needed service. In the context of R5.2, a limitation on the member's ability will be deemed "material" if the client or employer (a) would not have retained the services of the member or (b) would have retained the services of the member only at a lower compensation rate, had the client or employer known the true facts about the member's professional ability. The extent to which a member should volunteer such facts necessarily must be left to sound professional judgments of what is required under the circumstances.
G5.3 Since many members are product suppliers, R5.3 deals with misrepresentations or concealments of material limitations on the product's efficacy or ability to meet the needs of an actual or potential customer. The test of materiality is essentially the same as that expressed in G5.2 above (though here the language would be slightly modified to speak of customers, the purchase of a product, the product price and the true facts about limitations on the product's efficacy). Again, the extent to which a member should volunteer facts about product limitations necessarily must be left to sound professional judgments of what is required under the circumstances. It should also be subject to the dictates of R5.2, whenever such member is rendering or proposing to render professional services to others (as an actual or prospective employee, or otherwise).
G5.4 Beyond the specific obligations under R5.4, a member should generally exercise caution and sound judgment in dealing with any confidential or privileged information.
G5.5 Though a member should exercise independent judgment in making recommendations to clients, the member should be mindful of his or her personal limitations. A member should not hesitate to seek or recommend the counsel of other professionals, therefore, not only at the request of the client but also at the initiative of the member, particularly in doubtful or difficult situations or when the quality of professional service may otherwise be enhanced by seeking or recommending such consultation.
G5.6 The duty to disclose actual or potential conflicts of interests, as expressed in R5.6, is an ethical duty, whether or not such disclosures are required by law. The member is not obligated by the Rule to disclose every potential or actual conflict of interest, but only those which both (a) are or should be known by the member, through the exercise of reasonable care and diligence, and (b) are likely to impair the member's objectivity. The latter obviously requires the member to make judgments about the likelihood or remoteness of impairment. Once the conflict is disclosed, its impact on impairment and the desirability of retaining the member's services will also be judged by the prospective client, prospective contractor or other prospective employer. Assuming the employer agrees, the member is then free to perform the service, in spite of the actual or potential conflict, but only if doing so would not violate any other other Rule in this Code. Members who render services to "clients" should be especially mindful of R5.7 and the possibility that it may be violated in a conflict-of-interest situation.
G5.7 Many Association members render professional services to "clients'' (as broadly defined in G.2). However, there are considerable differences among such members, in terms of the occupation to which they belong, the laws and ethics rules to which they are subject, the specific types of services they render, and the types of clients they serve as financial planners. This diversity is both a strength of the Association and one reason why the cooperative teamwork of several professionals is often the best way to serve financial planning needs of clients. Yet the diversity makes it especially difficult to define the concept of "professional independence." In one way or another, most codes of professional ethics stress the need for independence as a precondition of maintaining the professional's integrity and objectivity in the service of clients. But some codes do not define independence, while others follow the lead of the widely recognized professions, especially law and public accounting.
To oversimplify for the sake of brevity, a practicing attorney, as an advocate for a client, is said to owe his or her first and foremost ethical duty Lo the client, and the attorney is thus obliged to exercise independent judgment, as a professional, in the best interests of the client. In contrast, when a CPA expresses an auditor's opinion on the financial statements of a corporation, the CPA is said to owe his or her first ethical duty to the public, i.e., to creditors, stockholders, potential investors, regulatory agencies and other "third parties" who rely upon the integrity and objectivity of the CPA's professional opinion. As an auditor, the CPA is expected to maintain independence from the client, so that the opinions will be reliable. In tax practice, a CPA may resolve doubt in favor of the client, but only if there is reasonable support for the CPA's position.
The mandate of R5.7 accommodates the foregoing considerations and is consistent with Canon 1 ("members should place the public interest above their own"), G1.4 ("members should use good judgment in resolving any conflicts between ethics codes to which they are subject"), Canon 5 ("members should . . . maintain honorable relationships with . . . those whom they serve . . . and with all those who rely upon the member's professional judgments and skills"). Specifically, R5.7 obligates a member, in serving a client, to maintain professional independence. The appropriate type and degree of independence depends upon the nature of the service being rendered and whether the member is a practitioner (e.g., a practicing attorney or CPA) who is subject to legal or ethical requirements which define professional independence or prescribe the duties owed to clients in rendering the service in question. If so, the member should comply with such requirements, and they will be presumed to be in the public interest (for the purposes of the Code). However, if there are no such requirements for the member and the nature of the service in question, the member should follow the public accounting model of professional independence. That is to say, the member should maintain independence from the client, in order to preserve the member's professional objectivity_ and integrity. In most cases, observing this standard will simultaneously be in the best interests of the client, the member, the persons who rely upon the member's professional judgment, and the general public. But the member's first ethical duty is to serve the public interest. Thus, if a client asks the member to perform a service in a manner which clearly would violate a law, regulation, or Rule of this Code, the member is ethically obligated to refuse. In a borderline situation where there is doubt or uncertainty as to the legality or ethical propriety of a service volunteered by or requested of a member, the member who resolves such doubt in favor of the client runs the risk of a disciplinary action under this Code (unless the member is either a practicing attorney serving as an advocate for the client, or a CPA in tax practice).
G5.8 Ultimately, the best way for a member to establish and maintain honorable relationships with others is to earn their confidence and respect, by demonstrating high levels of professional competence and ethical conduct.
CANON 6
MEMBERS SHOULD ASSIST IN IMPROVING THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF FINANCIAL PLANNING.
RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT:
R6.1 A member shall support efforts to provide laypersons with objective information concerning their financial planning needs, as well as the resources which are available to meet their needs.
R6.2 A member shall not misrepresent the benefits, costs or limitations of any financial planning service or product, whether the product or service is offered by the member or by another individual or firm.
GUIDELINES FOR PROFESSIONAL
MISCONDUCT:
G6.1 To the casual observer, Canon 6 may seem self-serving, having been promulgated by an association for financial planners. It is, instead, an ethical commitment to serve the public interest, since improving the public understanding of financial planning would enhance appreciably the economic and social well-being of nations and their individual citizens. But financial planning needs can be fully met only if every citizen recognizes the importance of seeking competent and ethical assistance in analyzing and meeting these needs. Achievement of the desired result requires the combined efforts of both practitioners and educators.
G6.2 A member should neither engage in nor condone deceptive advertising or business practices which contribute to the widespread misunderstanding of financial planning methodologies or results. In all communications with the public, the minimum goal should be to educate, not indoctrinate, by providing objective and factual information.
G6.3 A member should keep abreast of legislation, changing economic conditions and other developments which may affect financial planning strategies or services, and should assist in keeping the public properly informed of such.
G6.4 A member is not required by the Rules to support legislation or lobbying efforts, or to take positions on controversial public issues. Nor do any of the Rules prohibit a member from engaging in such activities, in his or her own name, an individual citizen.
CANON 7
MEMBERS SHOULD USE THE FACT OF MEMBERSHIP IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH THE ASSOCIATION'S RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT.
RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT:
R7.1 A member shall not misrepresent the criteria for admission to Association membership, which criteria are.... (per new Bylaws).
R7.2 A member shall not misstate his/her authority to represent the Association. Specifically, a member shall not write, speak, or act in such a way as to lead another to believe that the member is officially representing the Association, unless the member has been duly authorized to do so by the officers, directors or Bylaws of the national Association.
R7.3 A member shall not use the fact of membership in the Association for commercial purposes but may use the fact of membership for the following non-commercial purposes: in resumes, prospectus, and in introductions if the speaker clearly states that the opinions and ideas presented are his/her own and not necessarily those of the IAFP.
R7.4 A member or prospective member applying for Association membership shall not misrepresent any credentials or affiliations with other organizations.
CANON 8
MEMBERS SHOULD ASSIST IN MAINTAINING THE INTEGRITY OF THE CODE OF PROFESSIONAL ETHICS OF THE ASSOCIATION.
R8.1 A member 0 shall not sponsor as a candidate for Association membership any person who is known by the member to engage in business or professional practices which violate the Rules of this Code.
R8.2 A member possessing unprivileged information concerning an alleged violation of this Code shall, upon request, reveal such information to the body or other authority empowered by the Association to investigate or act upon the alleged violation.
GUIDELINES FOR PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT:
G8.1 Since it is not an objective of the Association to achieve growth at the expense of ethical standards, members should not sponsor for membership, persons who clearly do not meet the prescribed minimums. On the other hand, a member should not become a self-appointed investigator or judge, because such matters are properly left to the Ethics Committee.
G8.2 The duty in Rule 8.2 does not obligate a member to volunteer adverse information about another member or an applicant for membership. Whether adverse information should be volunteered is left entirely to the judgment of the member. A member is required to supply information only upon request, and only if the information is unprivileged (information usually is "unprivileged", unless it is obtained by an attorney in the course of an attorney-client relationship).
The most important thing a member should do to assist in preserving the integrity of the Code is to comply voluntarily with both the letter and the spirit of the Code. Nonetheless, to protect the public and the integrity of the Code, the Rules must be strictly but fairly enforced. This can be achieved only if apparent Rule violations are promptly brought to the attention of the Ethics Committee.
G8. 3 Upon request, a member should serve on such disciplinary bodies as are prescribed by the Bylaws for the administration or enforcement of the Code. A member is obligated to disqualify himself/herself from such service, if (a) the member believes, in good conscience, that he/she could not serve in a fair and impartial manner, or (b) upon request of the Ethics Committee.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Ethics Committee would like to extend its appreciation to Dr. Ronald C. Horn, Professor of Insurance and Professional Studies, Baylor University, for his extensive insight, guidance and assistance in reviewing and revising the IAFP's Code of Professional Ethics. His tireless efforts have earned him the admiration and gratitude of our Association.
Additional thanks are extended to the Ethics Resource Center, Washington, DC, for their assistance in identifying Dr. Horn, and for their support during the process of reviewing and revising the Code.
Roger S. Walker, Chairman, Ethics Committee
Al Jeanfreau
Lewis Wallensky
Kay Baird, Executive Committee Liaison
William Shearer
Vernon Gwynne
Maureen Ordman, Staff
122/F
PROFETI-16
7/82
