My Security, My Ethics

War. What is it good for? Perhaps protecting our national security? Maybe. This morning I was out walking and thinking about the Iraq war: the trials of the soldiers who have been involved in abusing prisoners, the role of psychologists in the interrogations that are designed to lead to the capture of the enemy, the PENS report (The Presidential Task Force on Psychological Ethics and National Security), and the commentary and recommendations from representatives from the Divisions for Social Justice. In 2005, many questions and charges arose regarding the role psychologists played in the interrogation of detainees at Abu Graib and Guantanamo Bay, whether or not those psychologists had acted ethically, and whether or not the APA Ethics Code provided enough guidance to help psychologists in such extreme situations. Situations that might suggest that it is okay to torture or hurt someone in the interest of a greater good of protecting many people. I tried to put myself in the most extreme situation: a very close friend or relative threatening to kill my child and I needed to know from that person where my child is before a bomb blows him up. Would I be willing to see the individual tortured in order to save my child? The very first thing that became clear is that I should not be making the decision because I would not be objective enough. The second thing that was clear is that my thoughts about the individual are influenced by how much they are like me. Persons who are more like me seem more human. The more the person is different from me, the less human I can make that person. It quickly became apparent that my personal thinking and involvement are not enough on which to base such a fundamental decision. So what is enough? I propose that the following four steps will lead us to more appropriate decisions.

First, we must examine our own spiritual and moral compass. I need to rely on that in which I deeply believe and have faith and that which is bigger than I am.

Second, look at the official laws that govern our behavior. Those laws should help to shape my behavior by putting limits on what I can do to others and exposing me to the personal consequences that will accrue as result of my behavior.

Third, we must look at something that is higher than the law, our professional ethics. Hopefully, the ethics code would help me to aspire to behavior that is beneficent for others and right for me. Now it is quite likely that the psychologists who found themselves faced with difficult situations at Abu Graib and Guantanamo Bay had these three things going for them. All indications are that they did perform superbly. If there are any of our colleagues who fell short, we will eventually know.

But if one did fall short, it may have been from not using a fourth and essential step in this situation, an examination and understanding of the Guidelines on Multicultural Education, Training, Research, Practice, and Organizational Change for Psychologists. These guidelines clearly tell us that "recognition of the ways in which the intersection of racial and ethnic group membership with other dimensions on identity (e.g., gender, age, sexual orientation, disability, religion/spiritual orientation, educational attainment/experiences, and socioeconomic status) enhances the understanding and treatment of all people." Since we spent years developing these guidelines, which the Council of Representatives adopted in 2002, we know they are important. While the guidelines are not enforceable standards, they should and must inform our practice and our behavior. When the Ethics Code seems to not be enough, it is critical that we remember that we have other documents on which we can depend. The Multicultural Guidelines have been vetted through the entire APA governance and membership body. They are based on the best evidence we have available. These Guidelines and the Ethics Code provide a formidable duo when we are trying to make tough decisions in a cultural context.

Finally, it was clear to me that if I were trying to save my son I would want someone to use a method of interrogation that would get the best information. I would want an evidence-based and humane interrogation. Psychological practice must be based on the best evidence that we have available. So our science, our practice, our ethics and our guidelines make it possible for us to perform in ways that are beneficent to individuals and society and help us to "do no harm." But the most instructive thing that came to me during my long walk was from an old protest song from my early days: "War! What is it good for? Absolutely nothing!!"

For more information about Dr. Rosie Phillips Bingham, visit her website at:
http://saweb.memphis.edu/binghamforapapresident/