Association between unethical battlefield conduct and mental health: Implications for leaders and ethical risk assessments.

Abstract

Objective: Excessively violent or otherwise inappropriate acts by military personnel on the modern battlefield can impede mission success, and they can have detrimental effects on the victims, witnesses, and perpetrators. This study provides new insights into the association between unethical battlefield conduct and mental health, as well as the processes through which misconduct on military operations occurs. Method: Through a comprehensive literature review, we examine the scope of issues around unethical battlefield conduct and we consider the association between unethical conduct and mental health from different perspectives. Results: Our review culminates in a process model that suggests that mental health problems, such as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), can drive unethical battlefield conduct through anger induction and/or disregulation. Additionally, we propose a framework, the Triad of Ethical Risk, that underscores three factors that increase service members’ risk for acting unethically on the battlefield: (a) recent history of combat exposure, (b) history of committing offenses that underscore violence and/or impulsivity, and (c) recent history of anger-related behaviors. Conclusions: This practical framework can assist military leaders and health professionals in understanding the processes through which mental health can affect battlefield conduct, and in identifying personnel at risk of offending before they offend.

Empirical Research on Military Ethical Behaviour

“…Although there is no single agreed upon definition of unethical behaviour, this chapter follows Blanc et al (2018) in defining unethical behaviour as actions inconsistent with the LOAC or military values. Ethical risk is defined as the probability of military personnel acting in ways that are inconsistent with military values, and ethical risk factors are defined as situational, organizational, and individual factors that can influence the likelihood of unethical behaviour (Messervey and Lavergne 2016).…”

“…Four key findings emerged from the Vietnam battlefield ethics research. First, combat exposure predicts abusive violence, such that higher levels of combat exposure are related to greater abusive violence (Blanc et al 2018;Hiley-Young et al 1995;Warner et al 2011;. Second, many Vietnam veterans were exposed to atrocities, either in the form of witnessing or participating in atrocities and abusive violence.…”

“…Yet warfare has also had guiding principles and customs that would eventually become the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) and the Geneva Conventions (International Committee of the Red Cross 2004). Ethical behaviour in general is important for military personnel because of the physical and psychological consequences for the victims, the witnesses, the perpetrators, and for the success of the mission (Blanc et al 2018). It is therefore important to understand the causes of unethical behaviour among military personnel.…”

Training for Heat-of-the-Moment Thinking: Ethics Training to Prepare for Operations

“…A study with Dutch personnel showed that anger and disgust were the most salient emotions when military personnel described situations requiring a moral judgment that they encountered on operations (De Graaff et al, 2016). A growing body of research shows the link between anger and unethical conduct among current and former military personnel (Blanc et al, 2018). The U.S. MHAT survey reports (MHAT IV, 2006; MHAT V, 2008) revealed that service personnel who felt angry were more likely than service personnel who did not feel angry to engage in unethical behavior, including kicking and hitting non-combatants, modifying the rules of engagement, and unnecessarily damaging private property (MHAT IV, 2006; Wilk et al, 2013).…”

A latent core of dark traits explains individual differences in peacekeepers’ unethical attitudes and conduct

“…On the other hand, the unique contribution of RWA to warzone ethics suggest that we should not focus exclusively on the dark core because other factors can influence a soldier's ethical behavior. Moreover, in light of findings showing that SDO seems to increase during cadet training (Nicol, Charbonneau, & Boies, 2007) and that a mental illness during service is related to antisocial and morally transgressive behavior (Blanc, Warner, Ivey, & Messervey, 2018), we also think it is important to investigate whether malevolent traits are strengthened by military training or combat exposure .…”