How much of your health must you disclose to work together?
2026NowDeadline · Within 10 days before the return-to-work roster
Realistic synthesis
The people, events, figures, and contract terms are a synthetic premise. They are not statements of real cases or of current law. The source documents are the roots of the background and the norms and do not establish the premises of the scenario.
The question to decide
An employee returning during long-term treatment wants support but worries that disclosed health information will follow them into later evaluations. Colleagues need information to share the work, and if explanations are thin, adjustments may be mistaken for favoritism. How should information be divided between what only the manager knows and what is shared with the team?
Who decidesFictional workplace return-to-work support meeting
What the AI judgments chose
Reading the judgment record…
The options
The order shown is not a ranking of preference.
The situation as it stands
To divide the work, the team needs to know the available hours and functional capacity, but it does not need every detail of the diagnosis. Decision deadline: within 10 days, before the return-to-work schedule.
2026 synthetic scenario · Sharing the health information of an employee undergoing long-term treatment with the team. The people, organizations, figures, and events are fictional.
- Premise 1To divide the work, the team needs to know the available hours and functional capacity, but it does not need every detail of the diagnosis.
- Premise 2The stakeholder wants help but worries that the health information will remain in later evaluations.
- Premise 3If only the manager knows the information, colleagues may misread the work allocation as favoritism.
Where it holdsInformation needed for work coordination and the team's division of duties
What is still unknown
- Unknown 1The minimum information strictly needed for the work
- Unknown 2The recipients and the period the stakeholder has consented to
- Unknown 3The procedure for separating evaluation records from support records
Signals to decide again
- Decide what observation, responsible person, and confirmation channel will verify 「the minimum information strictly needed for the work」, and re-judge if a new verification changes the tradeoffs of the options.
- Decide what observation, responsible person, and confirmation channel will verify 「the recipients and the period the stakeholder has consented to」, and re-judge if a new verification changes the tradeoffs of the options.
- Decide what observation, responsible person, and confirmation channel will verify 「the procedure for separating evaluation records from support records」, and re-judge if a new verification changes the tradeoffs of the options.
Where the paths partNot answers — paths that part from the same starting point
The stakeholder wanted some explanation but did not want disclosure to a particular manager.
The team proposed a common rule by which colleagues can understand the allocation criteria without the diagnosis.
Material and rootsThe frame, the values and the background documents
How does the expansion of healing change the community's promises about distribution?
An exploratory perspective chosen by the creator. Does not claim supernatural validity or the superiority of any particular option.The benefits and costs of the options accrue to different stakeholders. Which loss to accept remains undecided.
A subject for the decision-maker to argue over; the materials carry no conclusion of their own.- WHO · Foresight Standing reference
- UNESCO · Ethics of Neurotechnology 2025
The record of this question
- Question
FSP-HEALTH-25· version 1.5.0- Content identity, SHA-256
6e1265ab67fef641d664478181af2468cdbf52dfd242a938b958267dae3dd496- Input files
- Question input JSON · What followed, JSON