The culture of interrogation: Evaluating detainees at Guantanamo Bay

Subverting an ethical code: American Psychological Association and the post-9/11 war on terror.

“…Engaging in double-speak to blur ethical issues by simultaneously acknowledging that brutal interrogation practices are prohibited while touting psychologists’ ability to protect detainees from harm 27 (also see Eidelson, 2017; Schoen, 2017; Soldz, 2021) .…”

“…Schoen (2017) observes another subtle form of denial: when we ask how “those psychologists” could commit such unimaginable acts. She asks us to imagine that we have been asked to do something important and told we are the right person for a job that has implications for life and death.…”

“…Disregarding and downplaying research indicating that torture does not produce accurate information 26 (also see Constanzo & Gerrity, 2009; Costanzo, Gerrity, & Lykes, 2007). Engaging in double-speak to blur ethical issues by simultaneously acknowledging that brutal interrogation practices are prohibited while touting psychologists’ ability to protect detainees from harm 27 (also see Eidelson, 2017; Schoen, 2017; Soldz, 2021) .…”

“…Publically critiquing the APA can have personal and professional costs, amply demonstrated when high-ranking APA officials demeaned critics (e.g., Ackerman, 2015). Schoen (2017) observes another subtle form of denial: when we ask how "those psychologists" could commit such unimaginable acts. She asks us to imagine that we have been asked to do something important and told we are the right person for a job that has implications for life and death.…”