Of more concern is discussion of the way the APA handled charges of violations of the ethics standards filed against a couple of military psychologists stationed at Guantanamo.
_____________________________________________ Claudia J. Stanny, Ph.D. Director Center for University Teaching, Learning, and Assessment University of West Florida Pensacola, FL 32514 Phone: (850) 857-6355 (direct) or 473-7435 (CUTLA) [email protected] CUTLA Web Site: http://uwf.edu/offices/cutla/ <http://uwf.edu/cutla/> Personal Web Pages: http://uwf.edu/cstanny/website/index.htm On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Paul C Bernhardt < [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I revise my complaint concerning the process by which the ethical > guidelines changes occurred which implied that they were not properly > vetted. It appears that there was a proper process. Whether that process > envisioned a situation such as it being used to justify participation in > otherwise illegal behavior is a different question. > > I believe that the change in ethics rules was terribly unfortunate. When > one effectively makes this the ethical standard: ‘These are our rules > unless it’s really really hard to follow them because your boss or a > government authority asks you to break them,’ what has been said is those > are not really rules. > > Maybe I’m naive and all similar professional ethical standards operate > the same way, that my imagining of pastoral confidentiality, as an example, > cannot be broken by an order by a superior or subpoena. > > > Paul C Bernhardt > Associate Professor of Psychology > Frostburg State University > pcbernhardt☞frostburg.edu > > > > > > On Jul 12, 2015, at 9:52 AM, Rick Froman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > It seems that, even with all the revelations, there is at least one > point that isn't clear to me. Paul notes below that, in his reading of the > full report, "the APA changed their ethics standards in a way that made it > easier for members to participate in torture." > > The APA press release on the report says: > > "Additionally, the report confirmed that the organization’s 2002 change > in its Code of Ethics was not the product of collusion. Mr. Hoffman “did > not see evidence” that the revisions “were a response to, motivated by, or > in any way linked to the attacks of September 11th or the subsequent war on > terror. Nor did we see evidence that they were the product of collusion > with the government to support torture.” As the organization has repeatedly > stated, the ethics code was revised to provide a defense for psychologists > when their ethical obligations on client confidentiality conflicted with > court-ordered directive ordering disclose of confidential patient > information." > > So, what is the case? Maybe APA happened to change their ethics > guidelines for one reason (without collusion or other motivation) and it > was subsequently used to justify behavior not contemplated in the revision? > Or is there something in the report that is being misrepresented by the APA > press release? > > > Rick > > Dr. Rick Froman > Professor of Psychology > John Brown University > Siloam Springs, AR 72761 > [email protected] > ------------------------------ > *From:* Paul C Bernhardt <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Saturday, July 11, 2015 10:05 AM > *To:* Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) > *Subject:* Re: [tips] Release of the Final Report of the Special > Investigator > > From my reading of the report, the APA changed their ethics standards in a > way that made it easier for members to participate in torture. Within the > constraints of the APA’s abilities, they relaxed the one control they had: > violation of ethics standards can mean sanction or expulsion from the APA, > which is a stain on a Clinical Psychologist’s record and may be useful in a > state board’s decision on a license review. Furthermore, state boards may > use the ethics standards of the APA for decisions on license review. Bottom > line, the APA made it much easier for anyone, particularly Clinical > Psychologists, to participate in torture. > > Because the APA changed the ethics standards, even those not directly > involved or knowledgable of the reasons are responsible. That pretty much > means the entire leadership, arguably the entire organization, has > responsibility. The reason I say this: when something as important at the > ethics standards are revised, all eyes should be on the revision, questions > should be asked, rationale deconstructed, motives interrogated, etc. > > I will give credit to the APA for not trying to sweep this report under > the rug. Prominent placement and owning up to it is good. Too bad that > didn’t happen (apparently) back during the ethical standards changes. > > Paul > > Paul C Bernhardt > Associate Professor of Psychology > Frostburg State University > pcbernhardt☞frostburg.edu > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=1989792.4335dcd8aae84aca9a8bb2e89f646286&n=T&l=tips&o=45866 > (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) > or send a blank email to > leave-45866-1989792.4335dcd8aae84aca9a8bb2e89f646...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > > > > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13144.1572ed60024e708cf21c4c6f19e7d550&n=T&l=tips&o=45868 > > (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) > > or send a blank email to > leave-45868-13144.1572ed60024e708cf21c4c6f19e7d...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > > > --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=45871 or send a blank email to leave-45871-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
