Psychologists abandon the Nuremberg ethic: Concerns for detainee interrogations

doi:10.1016/j.ijlp.2009.02.005

International Journal of Law and Psychiatry

Volume 32, Issue 3, May–June 2009, Pages 161-166

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2009.02.005 Get rights and content

Abstract

In the aftermath of 9-11, the American Psychological Association, one of the largest U.S. health professions, changed its ethics code so that it now runs counter to the Nuremberg Ethic. This historic post-9-11 change allows psychologists to set aside their ethical responsibilities whenever they are in irreconcilable conflict with military orders, governmental regulations, national and local laws, and other forms of governing legal authority. This article discusses the history, wording, rationale, and implications of the ethical standard that U.S. psychologists adopted 7 years ago, particularly in light of concerns over health care professionals' involvement in detainee interrogations and the controversy over psychologists' prominent involvement in settings like the Guantánamo Bay Detainment Camp and the Abu Ghraib prison. It discusses possible approaches to the complex dilemmas arising when ethical responsibilities conflict with laws, regulations, or other governing legal authority.

Section snippets

Rationale

Steven Behnke, J.D., Ph.D, the American Psychological Association Director of Ethics, stated APA's rationale for the change to ethics code Section 1.02, emphasizing that it was “written largely in response to conflicts regarding confidentiality, arising most often when courts issue subpoenas for psychologists' records” (Behnke, 2008, p. 54). Changing an ethics code to make the Nuremberg defense available and acceptable in regard to all ethical responsibilities whenever they conflict

Detainee interrogations as context

A concept like the Nuremberg ethic may seem abstract and dated until practical implications are considered in a specific contemporary context. One area in which the ethical responsibility and accountability of health care professionals are central concerns is the interrogation of detainees in settings like the Guantánamo Bay Detainment Camp and the Abu Ghraib prison.

The American Psychological Association has emphasized both the uniqueness and the value of psychologists' participation in this

Increasing conflict and criticism

Psychologists' assertions of their unique competencies and valuable contributions to detainee interrogations became a focus of heightened controversy. For example, Robert Jay Lifton (2008) critiqued the claims that “psychologists knew not to participate in activities that harmed detainees” and had unique competencies to protect detainees and make sure that interrogations avoided harmful methods.

The idea that psychologists should be kept around during interrogation in order to protect the person

The 2008 vote by the American Psychological Association membership

In 2008, after years of publicizing claims about the benefits of psychologists participating in the detainee interrogation process, the American Psychological Association sent a ballot to all members putting this policy up for a vote. On September 17, 2008, APA issued a press release announcing the results: “The petition resolution stating that psychologists may not work in settings where ‘persons are held outside of, or in violation of, either International Law (e.g., the UN Convention Against

The Nuremberg question

The American Psychological Association emphasizes psychologists' positive contributions to these interrogations. The APA president wrote in 2007: “The Association's position is rooted in our belief that having psychologists consult with interrogation teams makes an important contribution toward keeping interrogations safe and ethical” (Brehm, 2007). Even if this assertion is correct and psychologists' involvement during these years has kept the detainee interrogations both safe (e.g., ensuring

Suggested steps

How can individual health care professionals and the professional associations best respond to the complex issues involving the Nuremberg ethic of personal accountability, conflicts between ethical responsibilities and governmental authority, and the controversies over health care professionals' involvement in detainee interrogations? The following three steps, though by no means exhaustive, might be helpful.

Conclusion

It is impossible to know how widespread the impact of the American Psychological Association's reputation, size, and influence have been in these areas. For example, did a healthcare organization of over 148,000 members repeatedly endorsing over the years its participation in detainee interrogations, emphasizing the unique value of its competencies in this area, and offering public reassurances about those interrogations tend to encourage some in the public to believe that the methods used were

References (50)

American Civil Liberties Union. (2008, April 30). Newly unredacted report confirms psychologists supported illegal...
American Psychological Association
American Psychological Association
Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct
American Psychologist
(1992)
American Psychological Association. (2005, June). Report of the American Psychological Association Presidential Task...
American Psychological Association
Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct
American Psychologist
(2002)
American Psychological Association. (2006). Resolution against torture. Retrieved October 12, 2008, from...
American Psychological Association. (2007a). Reaffirmation of the APA position against torture. Retrieved October 12,...
American Psychological Association. (2007b, September 21). Statement of the American Psychological Association on...
American Psychological Association. (2008a, February 22). Amendment to the reaffirmation of the American Psychological...
American Psychological Association. (2008b, September 17). APA members approve petition resolution on detainee settings...

American Psychological Association. (2008c, July 28). Petition on psychologists' work settings: questions and answers....

Boston Globe. (2008, August 30). Boston globe editorial: psychologists and torture. Boston Globe. Retrieved October 12,...

Brehm, S. (2007, January 9). American Psychological Association news release of letter from the APA president to the...

BehnkeS.H.

Ethics and interrogations: Comparing and contrasting the American Psychological, American Medical and American Psychiatric Association positions

Monitor on Psychology

(2006, August)

Behnke, S.H. (2008, September 1). Detainee Interrogations: American Psychological Association Counters, but questions...

BurkeE.

Reflections on the revolution in France

(1961)

CocksJ.

Psychotherapy in the Third Reich

(1985)

EbanK.

Rorschach and awe

Vanity Fair

(2007, July 17)

GallagherH.G.

By trust betrayed: patients, physicians, and the license to kill in the Third Reich

(1990)

GandhiM.K.

Non-violence in peace and war

(1948)

GeuterU.

The professionalization of psychology in Nazi Germany

(1992)

Goodman, A. (2007, June 8). Psychologists implicated in torture. Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Retrieved October 12,...

GoodmanA. et al.

Psychologists in denial

Hallinan v. Committee of Bar Examiners. (1966). 65 Cal. 2d...

KingM.L.

Stride toward freedom

(1958)

Cited by (31)

Violence and violations: Perspectives of non-professional audiences on enhanced interrogation
2021, Ethics, Medicine and Public Health
This article analyses how the Enhanced Interrogation programme was discussed and ethically interpreted on a major internet forum.
Posts on this forum were thematically analysed.
Six major themes were identified: Perspectives on Enhanced Interrogators; Perceived Efficacy of Enhanced Interrogation; Perceived Ethics of Enhanced Interrogation; Manipulation of Public Opinion about Enhanced Interrogation's violence; and Accountability/Lack of Accountability for Enhanced Interrogation.
The results suggest that internet forums can act as counterveiling spaces for the development of anti-Enhanced Interrogation narratives. They also suggest that it might be useful for anti-torture messaging to emphasise the role of self-/economic interest in torture, and emphasise the ethical elitism of the audiences who are the targets of such messaging.
The chiral nature of the enhanced interrogation programme
2018, Aggression and Violent Behavior
Citation Excerpt :
The group referred to here as traditional professionals (referred to in various media reports as dissident health professionals and human rights activists (Pope, 2011a; Risen, 2015)) wanted, post-PENS and post the revelations of the enhanced interrogation programme, to prevent psychologists from becoming involved as interrogators in national security interrogations, and in particular to prevent them from using aggressive interrogation tactics (Eidelson, 2016; Elkins, 2015). This group argued that the APA had engaged in activities that supported the potential for enhanced interrogation torture, in a general if not specific sense (Physicians for Human Rights, 2015a) and indirectly lent support for psychologists who were possibly violating the Nuremberg code (Pope & Gutheil, 2009). Researchers said that “the fact that a professional body can support such activity is a disgrace” (Wilks, 2005).
The United States suffered a catastrophic attack on September 11th 2001. The response to these killings, by the United States and its allies, was extremely forceful. As part of this response, US security institutions, and the health professionals who worked for them, developed an ‘enhanced interrogation’, or torture, programme to acquire intelligence from detainees in their custody. The enhanced interrogation programme has been described as a ‘conflicted’ phenomenon. This article considers in detail precisely why the enhanced interrogation programme, and the role of health professionals in it, can be said to be conflicted. The article identifies a number of reasons, including: the ambiguous and divided nature of the violence used in it; the dual roles that health professionals played in the enhanced interrogation initiative as healers and interrogators; professional division over the programme's ethics and effectiveness; the serious and negative impacts that the programme had on interrogators as well as detainees; and its split legacies. Underlying these individual reasons is the sense that the enhanced interrogation initiative was ‘doubled’, something that often pulled in two opposing dimensions simultaneously, and could be interpreted in divergent ways. The article concludes with a reiteration of the reasons why torture is ethically and effectively wrong.
Moving Human Rights to the Forefront of Psychology: Summary of the Final Report of the APA Task Force on Human Rights
2022, American Psychologist
Learning to Paddle Against the Current: A Commentary on Conrad’s (2019)“Moving Upstream in the Post-Hoffman Era When Ethical Responsibilities Conflict With the Law”
2021, Professional Psychology: Research and Practice
Beyond the Boundaries: Ethical Issues in the Practice of Indirect Personality Assessment in Non-Health-Service Psychology
2020, Journal of Personality Assessment
Moving upstream in the post-Hoffman era: When ethical responsibilities conflict with the law
2019, Professional Psychology: Research and Practice

View all citing articles on Scopus

View full text