American Psychological Association Hit With New Torture Allegations

sciencehabit writes: Did the American Psychological Association (APA) collude with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to enable the torture of detainees in the War on Terror? The answer won't be known until June, when an independent investigation is due to conclude. But at least one thing was made clear in a report from an independent group of psychologists based on e-mail exchanges between APA and CIA officials from 2003 to 2006: The world's largest professional organization for psychologists has maintained a surprisingly cozy relationship with the defense and intelligence community.

Comments

Not that surprising....

[HuntingHades]

It really isn't surprising that the defense and intelligence communities would interact with the APA or at least with some group of psychologists. The defense and intelligence communities would have a vested interest in training their own members in how to deal with torture and interrogations in case they are ever captured. And unfortunately its hard to study and practice those defensive techniques without also learning how to actually conduct those techniques on your own detainees. The nature and tone of the discussions is somewhat relevant though - did they approach the APA asking how best to torture someone to get info, or did they go in asking for defensive techniques and training for their own agents?

Leaping to assumptions

[squiggleslash]

I know nothing about the relationship between the APA and the CIA/FBI/TSA/NSA/GOP here, so it may all be terrible. But: there are reasons to cooperate with a body that might misuse your work that do not involve encouraging them to misuse it. One example might be if the advise offered was on how to get answers out of someone without torturing them.

One community that would, presumably, be very good at the whole knowing how to "Get information out of people without torturing them" would be psychologists (well, at least 43% of the time ;-)).

Yes, I may be wrong here. But the truth is I'd rather wait until this report is published, than leap to assumptions.

Re:Leaping to assumptions

[hey!]

I'm a member of several professional associations, including IEEE and the ACM. These societies have codes of ethics, which mandate things like respecting data privacy, accepting and cooperating with professional review, honoring contracts, respecting the rights of system stakeholders, providing honest estimates of project costs, disclosing conflicts of interest etc.

It's mostly stuff that almost goes without saying, so I have say I don't think much about these codes. But I sure would be pissed if one of these organizations was involved in helping the government violate its own code of ethics.

APA has a code of ethics for its members. Getting information out of an unwilling subject technically violates several principles the APA expects its own membership to abide by. For example the code of ethics requires APA members to safeguard the rights of anyone they're involved with professionally, and in particular those in situations where the subject's autonomy is limited. This would clearly forbid an APA member to be involved in the development of *any* coercive method, even if that method falls short of the legal definition of "torture".

Now arguably APAs code of ethics is too restrictive; arguably psychologists should be able to develop coercive methods so long as those methods are in the interest of society and do not rise to a reasonable standard of "torture". But until the APA rewrites its code of ethics it should refrain from any action which arguably might violate that code. To do otherwise, particularly secretly is morally repugnant for a dues-supported membership organization. It may even be malfeasance, since a non-profit is supposedly bound by the purpose for which it is chartered in its spending decisions.

Re:Not everyone is a wingnut like the submitter

[Anonymous Coward]

It would be like them going to the AMA and asking what's the most effective way to cut someone up.

Doctors are meant to heal not inflict damage. It's attitudes like yours that does the most damage to society.

As we always said in college

[Lucas123]

The ones who major in Psychology are typically the ones who need it.

In Their Defense

[Greyfox]

It turns out it was only actually torture about 39% of the time.

Real doctors take an oath to do no harm with the knowledge they've been granted. I guess that's why the CIA went with psychologists.

Re:Unfair rap?

[geekmux]

DO we blame plier manufacturers for their roles in torture? What is the difference between a physical tool and a psychological one?

Unless there's a new ISO standard for ripping apart fingers and testicles for plier manufacturers, I'd say premeditation has a hell of a lot to do with the difference.

A national shame

[Tablizer]

The fact that nobody went to jail for US waterboarding is disturbing.

The US had used allegations of waterboarding against Japanese decision makers in the post WWII war-crimes trials to sentence them. Although, it should be noted that it was typically one of multiple torture allegations.

http://www.politifact.com/virg...

We are filthy hypocrites. Somebody(s) should be locked up a good long time.

Re:I'm having a hard time seeing the problem

[Anonymous Coward]

It is a matter of ethics, not political ideology (though I do loathe the neocons and whatever the Democrats have been turning into in the last 40 years). Torture doesn't work, the CIA should know this. They tortured anyway. Why? Because they were permitted/encouraged to do so. There may be a somewhat blurry line between interrogation and torture, but that line was very clearly crossed numerous times and those who performed, allowed, and authorised it should be made to face criminal charges. If you're not angry about crimes by your government, well, that's your conscience to deal with, not mine. I don't think it's reasonable to just shrug your arms and say, "what can you do?"