The Ethics of Interrogation — The U.S. Military's Ongoing Use of Psychiatrists

Abstract

In May 2006, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) adopted a position statement prohibiting psychiatrists from “direct participation” in the interrogation of any person in military or civilian detention — including “being present in the interrogation room, asking or suggesting questions, or advising authorities on the use of specific techniques of interrogation with particular detainees.” 1 A few weeks later, the Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs of the American Medical Association (AMA) issued a similar opinion, stating that “physicians must neither conduct nor directly participate in an interrogation, because a role as physician– interrogator undermines the physician’s role as healer.”2 The opinion defines direct participation as including “monitoring interrogations with the intention of intervening.” Although the AMA and APA conceded that physicians could participate in general training of interrogation personnel, both organizations firmly opposed physicians’ helping to devise interrogation plans for individual detainees.