Showing posts with label torture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label torture. Show all posts
7/08/2010
Psychologists and Prisoner Abuse -- Story Continues
The licenses of psychologists who were involved in the "harsh interrogation" of prisoners at Guantanamo are at risk, according to this article from the Dayton Daily News. Larry James, dean at Wright State University's School of Professional Psychology, has been the subject of two earlier suits, both of which were dismissed.
8/12/2009
APA - Toronto
The APA convention in Toronto is now over. A few thoughts:
- It was a pleasure to serve as program chair for Division 36. I enjoyed being able to organize paper sessions, and I deeply valued the chance to work with the reviewers. They gave me excellent input on the program.
- There were some very interesting papers and posters presented, more than I could possibly have attended.
- I was surprised -- although, given the economy, perhaps I should not have been -- at the number of posters that did not make it to convention.
- For me, the convention got off to a poor start when the fire alarm at my hotel sounded at 2:00 a.m. Walking down 16 flights of stairs, waiting, and then having difficulty getting back to sleep, made me so tired that I missed some sessions that I had hoped to see. In my younger days I might have made it through the convention despite the poor sleep, but I'm not as young as I used to be. Such is life.
- I greatly enjoyed meeting several people whose research I have read and deeply respected. By far, that was a highlight of the convention for me.
- Division 36, FWIW, appears to be one of (if not the) most conservative groups in APA. Like many things in life, whether or not this is a good thing depends on one's perspective.
- Toronto is a remarkably vibrant city. A highlight was visiting The Royal Ontario Museum where I saw the Dead Sea Scrolls, as well as several other fascinating exhibits.
On another topic from APA a few years ago, I see more information about psychologists involved in so-called 'harsh interrogation' is becoming available. When the news broke a few years ago, I nearly left APA. The organization's tepid response to the situation left me very dissatisfied, and I remain ambivalent at best about APA. Years ago, I left APA because it focused on practice and neglected research. I rejoined when it appeared to balance the two interests more effectively. Now, I find that its morals and mine are not quite consonant. There isn't enough of a discrepancy for me to part ways, but I confess to being distinctly unsatisfied. Not that anyone has asked, but this is one of the things that blogs are for, right?
- It was a pleasure to serve as program chair for Division 36. I enjoyed being able to organize paper sessions, and I deeply valued the chance to work with the reviewers. They gave me excellent input on the program.
- There were some very interesting papers and posters presented, more than I could possibly have attended.
- I was surprised -- although, given the economy, perhaps I should not have been -- at the number of posters that did not make it to convention.
- For me, the convention got off to a poor start when the fire alarm at my hotel sounded at 2:00 a.m. Walking down 16 flights of stairs, waiting, and then having difficulty getting back to sleep, made me so tired that I missed some sessions that I had hoped to see. In my younger days I might have made it through the convention despite the poor sleep, but I'm not as young as I used to be. Such is life.
- I greatly enjoyed meeting several people whose research I have read and deeply respected. By far, that was a highlight of the convention for me.
- Division 36, FWIW, appears to be one of (if not the) most conservative groups in APA. Like many things in life, whether or not this is a good thing depends on one's perspective.
- Toronto is a remarkably vibrant city. A highlight was visiting The Royal Ontario Museum where I saw the Dead Sea Scrolls, as well as several other fascinating exhibits.
On another topic from APA a few years ago, I see more information about psychologists involved in so-called 'harsh interrogation' is becoming available. When the news broke a few years ago, I nearly left APA. The organization's tepid response to the situation left me very dissatisfied, and I remain ambivalent at best about APA. Years ago, I left APA because it focused on practice and neglected research. I rejoined when it appeared to balance the two interests more effectively. Now, I find that its morals and mine are not quite consonant. There isn't enough of a discrepancy for me to part ways, but I confess to being distinctly unsatisfied. Not that anyone has asked, but this is one of the things that blogs are for, right?
9/17/2008
APA Referendum Passed
Good news! You can infer more on my view from here and here. Having said that, please be aware that I am swamped right now and unlikely to be able to engage in an ongoing discussion. (Which is why I haven't even finished posting my thoughts about this year's convention. Sigh.
###
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, Sept. 17, 2008
CONTACT: APA Office of Public Affairs
APA MEMBERS APPROVE PETITION RESOLUTION ON DETAINEE SETTINGS
WASHINGTON -- 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 Torture and the Geneva Conventions) or the US Constitution (where appropriate), unless they are working directly for the persons being detained or for an independent third party working to protect human rights” was approved by a vote of the APA membership. The final vote tally was 8,792 voting in favor of the resolution; 6,157 voting against the resolution. To become policy, a petition resolution needs to be approved by a majority of those members voting.
Per the Association’s Rules and Bylaws, the resolution will become official APA policy as of the Association’s next annual meeting, which will take place in August 2009. At that time, the APA Council of Representatives will also determine what further action may be necessary to implement the policy.
The approval of the petition resolution represents a significant change in APA’s policy regarding the involvement of psychologists in interrogations. The petition resolution limits the roles of psychologists in certain defined settings where persons are detained to working directly for detainees or for an independent third party to protect human rights, or to providing treatment to other military personnel.
This new petition resolution expands on the 2007 APA resolution, which called on the U.S. government to ban at least 19 specific abusive interrogation techniques, including waterboarding, that are regarded as torture by international standards. The 2007 resolution also recognized that “torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment can result not only from the behavior of individuals, but also from the conditions of confinement,” and expressed “grave concern over settings in which detainees are deprived of adequate protection of their human rights.”
APA will continue to call upon the Department of Defense and Congress to safeguard the welfare and human rights of detainees held outside of the United States and to investigate their treatment to ensure the highest ethical standards are being upheld.
# # #
The American Psychological Association (APA), in Washington, DC, is the largest scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the United States and is the world's largest association of psychologists. APA's membership includes more than 148,000 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants and students. Through its divisions in 54 subfields of psychology and affiliations with 60 state, territorial and Canadian provincial associations, APA works to advance psychology as a science, as a profession and as a means of promoting human welfare.
###
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, Sept. 17, 2008
CONTACT: APA Office of Public Affairs
APA MEMBERS APPROVE PETITION RESOLUTION ON DETAINEE SETTINGS
WASHINGTON -- 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 Torture and the Geneva Conventions) or the US Constitution (where appropriate), unless they are working directly for the persons being detained or for an independent third party working to protect human rights” was approved by a vote of the APA membership. The final vote tally was 8,792 voting in favor of the resolution; 6,157 voting against the resolution. To become policy, a petition resolution needs to be approved by a majority of those members voting.
Per the Association’s Rules and Bylaws, the resolution will become official APA policy as of the Association’s next annual meeting, which will take place in August 2009. At that time, the APA Council of Representatives will also determine what further action may be necessary to implement the policy.
The approval of the petition resolution represents a significant change in APA’s policy regarding the involvement of psychologists in interrogations. The petition resolution limits the roles of psychologists in certain defined settings where persons are detained to working directly for detainees or for an independent third party to protect human rights, or to providing treatment to other military personnel.
This new petition resolution expands on the 2007 APA resolution, which called on the U.S. government to ban at least 19 specific abusive interrogation techniques, including waterboarding, that are regarded as torture by international standards. The 2007 resolution also recognized that “torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment can result not only from the behavior of individuals, but also from the conditions of confinement,” and expressed “grave concern over settings in which detainees are deprived of adequate protection of their human rights.”
APA will continue to call upon the Department of Defense and Congress to safeguard the welfare and human rights of detainees held outside of the United States and to investigate their treatment to ensure the highest ethical standards are being upheld.
# # #
The American Psychological Association (APA), in Washington, DC, is the largest scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the United States and is the world's largest association of psychologists. APA's membership includes more than 148,000 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants and students. Through its divisions in 54 subfields of psychology and affiliations with 60 state, territorial and Canadian provincial associations, APA works to advance psychology as a science, as a profession and as a means of promoting human welfare.
8/18/2008
Giving APA a Second Chance
About a year ago I became disenchanted with the American Psychological Association over its stance on psychologists' involvement in torture. At the encouragement of a few people whose opinions and experience I respect, I decided to give APA a second chance. How long I am a member remains to be seen, but I was persuaded that in the current atmosphere if people who object to the policy leave, the organization is less likely to change. Instead, I decided to look for a way to improve things in the organization.
I recognize that there is still a very real danger that psychological work may be - and probably is - being misused, as this story from Inside Higher Ed describes. I also agree with the people who protested APA policy at the 2008 Convention. While I respect those who have renounced their membership in APA, I see less opportunity to facilitate change if I am outside the organization than if I am inside it.
So, I decided to go to Boston to attend the 2008 convention. It was a good conference in many ways. I will post a few thoughts about it during the coming few days.
What did I find in my efforts to help improve APA? Two things. One tangible way that you and I can affect the organization is to vote for Steven Reisner for APA president. I have no delusions that Reisner will win the election, but I do hope that he attracts enough votes that he causes more people in the association to reconsider their position. Even if he were elected president, I question whether one person's energy is enough to change bureaucratic inertia.... But still, if a significant portion of the votes went to him, I think that the bureaucracy would take note.
Another way I found came to me in the form of an invitation to serve as program chair for Division 36. At a minimum, it is a tangible way to help APA be the best it can be, and to help advance scholarship on the psychology of religion. So, if you have an interest in developing a symposium or other presentation for the 2009 convention in Toronto, get in touch with me. I would especially love to see proposals - whether symposia, papers, or posters - that dealt with the question of religion and war, nationalism, terrorism, or other aspects relevant to our troubled times. Of course, all proposals will go through the normal vetting process, but proposals that deal with these issues seem particularly timely. Proposals will be due at the beginning of December; the APA webpage will soon have more details, which I will pass along here.
I recognize that there is still a very real danger that psychological work may be - and probably is - being misused, as this story from Inside Higher Ed describes. I also agree with the people who protested APA policy at the 2008 Convention. While I respect those who have renounced their membership in APA, I see less opportunity to facilitate change if I am outside the organization than if I am inside it.
So, I decided to go to Boston to attend the 2008 convention. It was a good conference in many ways. I will post a few thoughts about it during the coming few days.
What did I find in my efforts to help improve APA? Two things. One tangible way that you and I can affect the organization is to vote for Steven Reisner for APA president. I have no delusions that Reisner will win the election, but I do hope that he attracts enough votes that he causes more people in the association to reconsider their position. Even if he were elected president, I question whether one person's energy is enough to change bureaucratic inertia.... But still, if a significant portion of the votes went to him, I think that the bureaucracy would take note.
Another way I found came to me in the form of an invitation to serve as program chair for Division 36. At a minimum, it is a tangible way to help APA be the best it can be, and to help advance scholarship on the psychology of religion. So, if you have an interest in developing a symposium or other presentation for the 2009 convention in Toronto, get in touch with me. I would especially love to see proposals - whether symposia, papers, or posters - that dealt with the question of religion and war, nationalism, terrorism, or other aspects relevant to our troubled times. Of course, all proposals will go through the normal vetting process, but proposals that deal with these issues seem particularly timely. Proposals will be due at the beginning of December; the APA webpage will soon have more details, which I will pass along here.
10/23/2007
Torture, Psychology and Ethics in APA
You may or may not have read about recent protests of the APA and its stance on psychologists engaged in torture. On the one hand, it sounds as though the APA has taken a strong position against psychologists being involved in torture. The APA's press release states that psychologists are prohibited from a long list of tactics, including "mock execution; water-boarding or any other form of simulated drowning or suffocation; sexual humiliation; rape; cultural or religious humiliation; exploitation of phobias or psychopathology; induced hypothermia; and the use of psychotropic drugs or mind-altering substances for the purpose of eliciting information. In addition, the following acts were banned for the purpose of eliciting information in an interrogations process: hooding; forced nakedness; stress positions; the use of dogs to threaten or intimidate; physical assault including slapping or shaking; exposure to extreme heat or cold; threats of harm or death; and isolation and/or sleep deprivation used in a manner that represents significant pain or suffering or in a manner that a reasonable person would judge to cause lasting harm; or the threatened use of any of the above techniques to the individual or to members of the individual's family."
And yet I have read, in many different sources, that the APA's position is more equivocal than it sounds. The resolution passed at the August 07 APA council meeting allows psychologists to assist with interrogations in their work, even when the interrogations might not protect the prisoner's rights. The rationale that I heard for this, from APA leadership at the August meeting, is that the APA leadership believes that the presence of a psychologist can protect the prisoner's rights. The APA asserts that being involved in the process helps to protect prisoners. Critics decry such logic as naive, and say that it disregards what we know about social psychological processes.
I am sad to say that I am more persuaded by the critics than by the APA, and I am considering resigning from the APA.
Here is some of the material I have been reading.
- Three colleges havecondemned the APA for violating psychology's ethical standards
- A June 6, 2007 letter to Sharon Brehm, APA President, decrying psychologists' involvement in the US military's SERE program, and is based on declassified US Department of Defense report documenting psychologists' work in that program.
- Beth Shinn's letter of resignation from the APA. Shinn has been president of two APA divisions and received awards for her work in psychology. Her letter includes links to several other informative work.
- There is a growing list of APA members who are witholding their dues to protest the APA.
- The website Psychologists for an Ethical APA has several informative documents and links. Included among them are Linda Woolf's commentary on the situation, and links to interviews with Mary Pipher, who returned her 2006 APA Presidential Citation as a result of the APA's actions on this issue. There are several other worthwhile links here, including syndicated columnist Amy Goodman's commentary.
There is more, but this will get you started.
I am dismayed by the actions of psychology's largest organization. In the coming few weeks I will read more, and decide whether or not I want to continue being a member of the APA. At this point, it seems to me that the Goodman's commentary is right, and the APA is in denial about its role. If you are aware of relevant evidence, pro or con, please forward it to me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
