Psychologists’ Participation in Military Interrogatory Operations Essay

The progeny of ethical function is always in question especially in the medical and confederative medical sketchs. The article Psychologists Clash on Aiding Interrogations (Carey, 2008) tackles this government issue in the background of the services rendered by psychologists to military machine trading operations involving the doubtfulness of detainees.The article points egress certain details regarding this issue among opposites, those tackled were the issue of this type of assistance and its relevance to the Ameri back Psychologists Association work out of ethics, the consideration of inter home(a) laws in the writ of execution of a psychologists duties, the ethical responsibilities of a psychologist to the person cosmos interrogated, the kindred of the APA to the practice of its members, and the individual law of psychologists who chose to collaborate with the military in interrogative sentence operations.An initial approach to this issue would be to consider the spot of psychologists in society in the context or professionalism. Base on the precede of the APA Code of conduct, psychologists are committed to increasing scientific and professional cognition of behavior and peoples understanding of themselves and others and to the use of such association to improve the condition of individuals, organizations, and society (APA, 1992), in addition, psychologist should respect and protect genteel and world rights and the central importance of freedom of inquiry and expression in research, teaching, and publication.They strive to help the public in ontogeny informed judgments and choices concerning benevolent behavior. (APA, 1992) Certain features can be slow gleaned from these APA riposteages to none in occurrence are the psychologists roles in the development of academic knowledge in the field, the fostering of individual and social understanding, and in promoting and preserving individual, organizational, (your family name) 3 and soc ial social welfare. all over and above these professional roles are the particular attention given to elegant and human rights and the freedom of inquiry and expression.In this context there is no argument as to whether the psychological profession in general should consent to to workings with the military in interrogatory operations the mere particular that these tests do non serve the purposes of the profession as outlined above and whitethorn hitherto be violations of certain civil and human rights precisely shows that fighting(a) in military interrogations can be against the APA code of ethics. However, if the construct it part of the passage is considered, which concerns the preservation of individual, organization, and social welfare, psychologist participation in interrogations may actually serve this end.If the purpose of the military interrogation is to preserve the naturalized order and the issue is national security, then psychologists being account fitte d, not solitary(prenominal) to their patients notwithstanding also to their country, should do well by assisting the military in their operations. This is the argument put out by certain psychologists who have been rear to be collaborating with the military that they did not do boththing to cause misuse to some(prenominal) of the subjects of interrogation, rather, they merely ensured that the subjects were not caused any harm.In addition, they claimed to also be acting their duties to their country. Another perspective should be considered in this issue the reports that have been breathing out around that psychologists have been assisting the CIA and the military in developing abusive interrogation techniques used on terrorist suspects (Benjamin, 2007), that psychologists have collaborated with the military in the militarys secretive Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape program to reverse-engineer techniques originally designed to propose U.S. soldiers to resist tortu re if captured, by exposing them to brutal treatment. (Benjamin, 2007). These grim (your family name) 4 reports get down the issue of civil and human rights into the picture. In a profession that is easily abused as to its practice, civil and human rights should be protected at all costs, but what if those who are supposed to protect these rights are the ones violating the rights themselves?The military and psychology is a very unlikely and dangerous mix, with the former working for national security under the protection of national and international law, and the last mentioned working for the advancement of the psychological profession which incidentally could be of semiprecious use to the military, and with only the APA Code of Ethics standing in the way, possibilities can be very scary think Nazi concentration tenting style.However, certain arguments point out that psychologists, like their military counterparts are able to set aside the APA Code of Ethics in the interest o f national or international law. In the results of a 20025 APA Taskforce, it was implicitly implied that psychologists can fire their ethical code if a governing authority (in this case, the U. S. Military) asks them to do so. (Reiss, 2007) This signification is based on no less than the the APAs code of conduct, which states, in full, If psychologists ethical responsibilities conflict with law, regulations, or other governing legal authority, psychologists make known their commitment to the Ethics Code and take steps to result the conflict. If the conflict is unresolvable via such means, psychologists may adhere to the requirements of the law, regulations, or other governing legal authority. (APA, 1992)This brings the issue to a whole new train instead of the issue being an organizational or professional concern, it becomes a concern of individual integrity, which, by the way, becomes blurry when an individual is offered lucrative benefits and perks in exchange for that (your family name) 5 integrity. epoch the issue is obviously one that concerns not only the military, or the field of psychology, but the safety and welfare of even the most hostile subject of an interrogation, the APA Task Force served to bring the issue down to a more private level to dismiss whatever argument is raised by the profession as a whole.Now, it is basically a question of, As a psychologist, are you personally prone to assist the military in their interrogatory operations even when these operations can be inhumane and can violate civil and human rights as long as the operations are within the requirements of the law, regulations, or other governing legal authority (APA, 1992)? Many a psychologist would learn an easy answer to this question, because this question does not require a psychologist to debate any code of ethics or any law it on the button requires that the psychologist go through the process of self-discernment and consider, first and foremost, his/her re asons for choosing the psychology profession, his/her commitments to the people that he/she serves, and his/her priorities in exercising his/her profession. The issue of whether psychologists should collaborate with the military in developing interrogation techniques that may be inhumane is beyond the jurisdiction of any law or code.This issue is a question of morality and integrity, which, in themselves, are very subjective areas of abstraction. In a moment of personal thought, psychologists should at least put themselves in the shoes of the victims of these inhumane interrogation knowledge is indeed power, and power corrupts (Acton, 1887) Psychologists wield a considerable pith of knowledge with their training in the profession, and it is up to them whether they would use this knowledge to harm their fellow humans or not. (your family name) 6The solution to this problem lies in the individual integrities of psychologists. Each psychologist should maintain an internal regulatory mechanism when participating in these operations. The secret is being able to say no when what is being asked to be done is beyond our personal conviction, ideals, and the moral standards governing the profession. While laws and codes can only do so much in regulating what psychologists can do, these also serve as roads signs for psychologists so that they may be constantly reminded if they are already overstepping in their profession.On the issue of national security, some argue that the life of one can sometimes be dispensable for the life of all this argument is a ruse interpretation of the truth. Life, whether it be of only one, or of all is still life, and should not be meddled with in any aspect. Where does this put the psychologists conceding to collaborations with the military? In as much as we all want to believe in the integrity of our own chosen professions, we have to have faith in the individual and inherent goodness of man.We cannot condemn psychologists who work for the military just because we think what they are doing is inhumane, and it is also not up to us to pass personal judgment regarding the militarys motives but in as much as we have hope and confidence in the rationality and discernment of human beings, we might as well advocate integrity and morality as a whole, not only in the field of psychology.Individual issues and motivations of psychologists cannot be questioned by a raging mob but we can sure make them see the truth, and remind them of their commitment to the welfare of all, and not just for the satisfaction of brute and barbaric interests. (your family name)Works Cited Acton, put-on Emerich D. Power corrupts absolute power corrupts absolutely. The Phrase Finder. 1887. 26 Feb. 2009 .APA. Ethical Principles Of Psychologists And Code Of Conduct. APA Online. 2003. 26 Feb. 2009 . Benjamin, Mark. The CIAs torture teachers. Salon. com. 21 June 2007. 26 Feb. 2009 . Carey, Benedict. U. S. psychologists debate role in military in terrogations. International Heral Tribune The Americas. 16 Aug. 2008. 26 Feb. 2009 . Reiss, Natalie S. The Psychologists eccentric in Military Interrogations. Mentalhelp. net. 3 Aug. 2007. 26 Feb. 2009 .