WASHINGTON, 7 July 2005 — The American Psychological Association issued a report this week warning its members of the ethical dangers of advising interrogation officers on how to conduct harsh questioning of detainees, in “national security-related settings” in prisons such as Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

Although the report condemns torture in any form, it notes that it is acceptable to act as behavioral consultants to interrogators of prisoners held in US prisons overseas.

The major findings say that psychologists can serve in consultative roles to interrogation- or information-gathering processes for national security-related purposes. But notes that such roles entail “a delicate balance of ethical considerations, to assist in ensuring that such processes are safe and ethical for all participants.”

“Psychologists who serve in any position by virtue of their training, experience and expertise the APA ethics code always applies to their work. Psychologists who serve in the role of supporting an interrogation do not use health care related information to the detriment of an individual’s safety and well-being.” And, according to the APA, “psychologists must not engage in, direct, support, facilitate or offer training in torture or other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.” The report also notes that psychologists have “an ethical obligation to be alert to and report any acts of torture or cruel or inhuman treatment to appropriate authorities.”

Ronald Levant, president of the APA, said his decision to create this report came after “a number of critical questions arose during the past year about the proper role of psychologists working in investigations related to national security.”

Last month the New York Times interviewed former interrogators who said that doctors, either psychiatrists or psychologists, counseled interrogators on how to use a detainee’s fears and longings to increase distress.

But not everyone is happy with the report’s findings. Leonard Rubenstein, executive director for Physicians for Human Rights, told journalists the report failed to set firm ethical boundaries. “It says psychologists shouldn’t engage in torture, but we know that rhetoric like that is not effective,” he said. “In view of what has happened… in Guantanamo, we need clarity, and what’s lacking here is any explicit commitment not to participate in coercive interrogations.”

Rhea Farberman, director of communications at the APA, argued the report was meant only as an outline for APA members.