Albert Gable is a partner in a CPA firm located in a small midwestern city which has a population of approximately 65,000. Mr. Gables practice is primarily in the area of personal financial planning; however, he also performs an annual audit on the citys largest bank. Recently, Mr. Gable was engaged by Larry and Susan Wilson to prepare a comprehensive personal financial plan. While preparing the plan, Mr. Gable became personal friends of the Wilsons. They confided to him that they have had a somewhat rocky marriage and, on several occasions, seriously discussed divorce. Preparation of the comprehensive personal financial plan, which is nearing completion, has taken six months. During this period, Mr. Gable also performed the annual audit for the bank. The audit test sample selected at random from the banks loan file included the personal loan files of Larry and Susan Wilson. Because certain information in the loan files did not agree with facts personally known to Mr. Gable, he became somewhat concerned. Although he did not disclose his client relationship with the Wilsons, he did discuss their loan in detail with a loan officer. The loan officer is very familiar with the situation because he and Larry Wilson were college classmates, and now they play golf together weekly. The loan officer mentioned to Mr. Gable that he believed Larry Wilson was setting his wife up for a divorce. In other words, he was arranging his business affairs over a period of time so that he would be able to leave his wife penniless. The loan officer indicated that this was just locker room talk and that Mr. Gable should keep it confidential. Mr. Gables compensation from his firm is based upon annual billings for services. If Mr. Gable resigns as CPA for the Wilsons, it would result in his losing a bonus constituting a substantial amount in annual personal compensation. Mr. Gable is counting on the bonus to contribute to support tuition and expenses for his youngest daughter, who will be starting as a freshman in college next fall. Questions 1. What are the ethical issues? 2. What should Albert Gable do? Read the Locker Room Talk Ethics Case on p. 284 (Ch. 4) of the text. Analyze the case using stakeholder impact analysis and the philosophical approaches to ethical decision making. Explain what you think Albert should do in a 700- to 1,050-word paper. Organize your paper using the following section outlines. Review the questions for each section to help you analyze the case and frame your paper. o Introduction What is the ethical dilemma in the case? What events led to the dilemma? When describing the dilemma, did you mistakenly propose a solution? o Stakeholders Involved Have you identified stakeholders? What is their stake in the case? Have you described every stakeholder in an objective, unbiased way? o Course of Action Have you clearly stated the course of action Albert should take? What reasons support your decision? What philosophical approach did you use to reach your decision? What are the weaknesses of your argument? Have you addressed counterarguments? o Stakeholder Impact How do you think each stakeholder will be impacted by your decision? Are there potential impacts on stakeholders that are difficult to anticipate? Have you identified them? o Conclusion Do you present new evidence or analysis in the conclusion? Would it be more appropriate in another section of the paper? Have you summarized the dilemma, your decision, and the potential effect on stakeholders? Format your paper according to APA standards, including any references to the textbook or other sources. Note: An important part of your grade on this assignment is demonstrating your ability to think critically: to suspend judgment while gathering evidence and consulting the various stakeholders positions, to analyze each position, to consider the effects of different courses of action, and then to make a decision and support it with evidence and logic