Andrew, a highly qualified and experienced software developer, has just started work with a government health department on a project that has been underway for about 9 months. He is replacing a novice developer who has decided to move on to a new project with another organisation. Even though the current system is incomplete, it has is being used with 'live' data. On analysing what's been done so far, Andrew discovers that the system is poorly designed and is riddled with bugs due to the former developer's lack of expertise, and that the choice of technologies are incompatible with the department's infrastructure, leading to corruptions and loss of financial data on a daily basis. In fact, much of Andrew's time is initially spent unsuccessfully attempting to recover corrupted data. His vast experience leads him to the conclusion that the system is so unstable that it will eventually corrupt beyond repair and that all its data will become unrecoverable. He therefore advises the supervisor of his findings and recommends that the system be redeveloped using appropriate technologies and quality control measures. He indicates that the entire redevelopment effort will take less than 6 weeks. The supervisor rejects Andrew's recommendation, stating that their IT Department will not agree to a change in technology, and directs Andrew to complete the project using the existing technologies. What should Andrew do?

Clear explanation about how each of the four ethical theories can be applied to the scenario (2.5 marks for each explanation x 4 = 10 marks)