Abstract
Costanzo, Gerrity, and Lykes (2006) have done us all a great service in their review of the issues surrounding the discussion of psychologists and our role in the interrogation of prisoners, specifically those currently detained in foreign camps by the United States as “enemy combatants.” They present a comprehensive and compelling analysis of the literature on relevant professional codes of conduct, on the international and national laws prohibiting torture, on the effectiveness of using torture in interrogations, and on the consequences for perpetrators, survivors, and society. Their article is clear and their arguments are powerful. My comments, therefore, have two main purposes: (1) to outline some of the significant actions and positions taken by the Board and Council of the American Psychological Association (APA) with respect to the issues under discussion; and (2) to offer a more far-reaching proposal for APA than the ones presented by the authors.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
