Salesmen Psychiatrists & Medico malfeasance

[Michael Barwell]

BBC News: Psychologists outraged over colleagues' role in military interrogations
[size=12]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-33561052

[/SIZE]By Tara McKelvey White House reporter 23 July 2015
Psychologists took part in military interrogations at Guantanamo and in other places, according to a new report. Health professionals are grappling with the disclosures.
Sitting at a bar in Alexandria, Virginia, several years ago, a US army officer told me about some psychologists who'd helped during interrogations at Guantanamo.
I'd said I thought they were supposed to take care of people - not get information from them. He reassured me, saying they'd helped to ensure the interrogations were done in a proper manner.
A new[size=12]report[/SIZE] by a Chicago lawyer, David Hoffman, provides details about health professionals who'd agreed to participate in the interrogations during the administration of President George W Bush. The 542-page report also looks at the relationship between their professional organisation, the American Psychological Association (APA), and the military.
The report was commissioned by the APA after some members objected to the idea of psychologists participating in interrogations.
You want to be able to trust your doctorSteven Reisner, Co-founder, Coalition for an Ethical Psychology
In one instance a psychologist helped keep a detainee focused during his interrogation at Guantanamo. According to the report, the psychologist suggested he sit in a swivel chair "to keep him awake". It seemed like odd advice from a health professional - not to mention an unusual role for him.
Many people who work in the profession agree. "You want to be able to trust your doctor," says a New York psychologist, Steven Reisner, a co-founder of Coalition for an Ethical Psychology. "The only thing that should be on his mind is: 'what's the best for you.'"
That wasn't always the case for detainees, say the authors of the report.
A hut used for interrogations (seen in 2006)
The Defense Department is one of the nation's biggest employers of psychologists, and at the time the APA was trying to expand its role in the military's interrogation programme. Yet many of the detainees were treated harshly in the programme, which was a controversial aspect of President Bush's "war on terror".
For these reasons psychologists at the APA found themselves in an ethical dilemma.
"They wanted to take a position that allowed psychologists to be as involved as possible in interrogations," say the authors of the report. "But on the other hand they knew that to articulate this publicly in any sort of detail would look horrible."
The report, Mr Reisner says, set off a "huge uproar of shock and despair" among psychologists. Several APA leaders resigned, [size=12]according to a 14 July statement[/SIZE] , including its chief executive.
"APA apologises for the actions, policies and the lack of independence from government influence detailed in the Hoffman report," Jim Sliwa, the organisation's spokesman, told the BBC.
A military officer walks past a now unused part of Guantanamo
Officials in the military didn't sound happy about the report, either.
"The department is aware of the APA report," said a Defense Department spokesman, Major Ben Sakrisson, "and always takes any allegations of inappropriate activity seriously."
The report is filled with details about the relationship between psychologists and their professional organisation and the US military.
Yet one individual, the APA's ethics director, Stephen Behnke, stood out for his efforts to cultivate ties with military personnel.
He was an APA staff member who participated in a task force looking at interrogations and the role of psychologists. The task-force members examined whether an APA Ethics Code for psychologists (it states: "do no harm") adequately addressed the ethical dimensions of the topic.
With input from members of the task force, he wrote a report about their findings in June 2005. In an introduction, according to Mr Hoffman, Mr Behnke quoted the Ethics Code. He edited it slightly, however, leaving out the phrase: "do no harm".
In their report, the task-force members concluded it was OK for psychologists to participate in interrogations.
He also ran workshops for health professionals who assist in the interrogations of detainees.
Defense Department officials "called him a hero and their 'knight in shining armour'", according to the report.
Some 116 prisoners still remain at camps on the US military base
Members of the APA were surprised by the revelations in the report. Mr Behnke was, according to Mr Sliwa, "terminated" on 8 July because of its findings.
Speaking on Mr Behnke's behalf, his lawyer, former FBI director Louis Freeh, said he'd been misrepresented, adding Mr Behnke "strongly rejects the APA's Hoffman report as a gross mischaracterisation of his intentions, goals and actions".
[see below] The army officer who'd told me about health professionals at Guantanamo spoke highly of their work. He believed they made things better - for the detainees and the military officers. As more information about the role of psychologists at Guantanamo and other facilities comes to light, though, their work become harder to defend.
Many psychologists say they feel betrayed by their colleagues and by their own organisation.
"The basic idea is that we trust these professionals," Mr Reisner says. "But the APA sold out."


July 14, 2015
APA Announces Retirements and Resignation of Senior Leaders

WASHINGTON The American Psychological Association Board of Directors today announced the retirement of Dr. Norman Anderson, who has served as chief executive officer of the organization since 2003.
Prior to the release of the independent review, Dr. Anderson had informed the Board he intended to retire at the end of 2016. Dr. Anderson felt that moving up his retirement date to the end of 2015 would allow the association to take another step in the important process of organizational healing, and to facilitate APA's continuing focus on its broader mission.
The Board expressed its gratitude to Dr. Anderson for his distinguished tenure as the second longest serving CEO in the 123-year history of APA. Among the many accomplishments of APA under his leadership was the development, in 2009, of the first strategic plan in the history of APA. This plan continues to guide a significant portion of the work of the association in areas such as expanding psychology's role in health care and advancing the science of psychology.
Dr. Anderson's leadership to significantly increase APA's investment in its publishing operation produced a substantial growth in revenue that allowed APA to develop new and innovative activities. Among these activities were the founding of the Center for Psychology and Health, the creation of the Psychology: Science in Action public education campaign, the expansion of our work to eliminate health disparities, the development of treatment guidelines to promote the translation of psychological science into health interventions and the expansion of APA's presence on the Web and in social media with more than 35 million website visitors expected this year.
"We are grateful for Dr. Anderson's distinguished tenure and numerous contributions," the Board said. "The association has been very fortunate have Dr. Anderson as CEO for so many years, and we wish him well."
The Board also announced the Aug. 15, 2015, retirement of Deputy Chief Executive Officer Dr. Michael Honaker.
Dr. Honaker helped shepherd the association through its many changes through the years and did much to make APA a great place to work. Many of the initiatives he put in place led to APA receiving the 2014 Washington Post Top Places to Work award. He is one of the staff's most beloved officials.
APA also announced that Rhea K. Farberman, APA's executive director for public and member communications has resigned, ending her 22-year tenure with the association on July 31, 2015.
Ms. Farberman's contributions to APA during her tenure were numerous, and include leadership of APA's award-winning magazines, the APA Office of Public Affairs and journals publicity program, editorial and user experience management of APA's world-class website and the creation of many public education initiatives.
Ms. Farberman and the Board are in agreement that going forward APA plans to hire a chief communications officer who can provide a fresh start to the association's communications needs as it grapples with the problems identified by the Hoffman report. While the Board has the utmost regard for Ms. Farberman's skills, professionalism and integrity, it accepted her resignation.
The American Psychological Association, in Washington, D.C., is the largest scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the United States. APA's membership includes more than 122,500 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants and students. Through its divisions in 54 subfields of psychology and affiliations with 60 state, territorial and Canadian provincial associations, APA works to advance the creation, communication and application of psychological knowledge to benefit society and improve people's lives.

[Michael Barwell]

Nursing group honors Navy nurse who wouldn't force-feed at Guantánamo
July 22, 2015

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-w...55323.html

By Carol Rosenberg
crosenberg@MiamiHerald.com


GUANTANAMO BAY NAVY BASE, Cuba A leading American nursing organization is conferring an ethics award on a career Navy nurse who refused to force-feed hunger strikers last summer, even as, his attorney says, he is at risk of having his career cut short by the episode.
The New England-based nurse, a lieutenant, has never been identified. He was excused from service here, and at one point considered for court martial, for refusing to tube-feed a Syrian captive, Abu Wa'el Dhiab. Dhiab, since resettled in Uruguay, was at the time suing the Pentagon to stop the forced feedings.

Now the American Nurses Association says the unnamed nurse will receive a "Year of Ethics" award for putting his patient ahead of prison camp practice at ceremonies Thursday in Washington, D.C.
The nurse, who wants to serve until retirement with full benefits in December 2016, has declined to be publicly identified. So, in his place, his attorney Ronald Meister will collect the glass trophy on the nurse's behalf at the association's annual meeting. The organization has never given this award before.



Meister said separately that, while the Navy has chosen to take no action against the nurse, the Department of Defense recently notified the naval officer that it planned "to revoke his security clearance, and possibly place him once again in jeopardy of being discharged" in light of the episode. An earlier discharge could put the nurse's 20-year benefits at risk.
Meister called the move "mean spirited," and said "we intend to continue a vigorous defense."
Pentagon and Navy spokesmen had no immediate comment.

[Michael Barwell]

Outside Psychologists Shielded U.S. Torture Program, Report Finds By [size=12]JAMES RISEN[/SIZE] JULY 10, 2015
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/11/us/psy...inds.html#

WASHINGTON The [size=12]Central Intelligence Agency[/SIZE]'s health professionals repeatedly criticized the agency's post-Sept. 11 interrogation program, but their protests were rebuffed by prominent outside psychologists who lent credibility to the program, according to a new report.

The 542-page report, which examines the involvement of the nation's psychologists and their largest professional organization, the American Psychological Association, with the harsh interrogation programs of the Bush era, raises repeated questions about the collaboration between psychologists and officials at both the [size=12]C.I.A.[/SIZE] and the Pentagon.
The report, completed this month, concludes that some of the association's top officials, including its ethics director, sought to curry favor with Pentagon officials by seeking to keep the association's ethics policies in line with the Defense Department's interrogation policies, while several prominent outside psychologists took actions that aided the C.I.A.'s interrogation program and helped protect it from growing dissent inside the agency.

[URL="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/07/09/us/document-report.html"][size=12]Document Psychologists and Enhanced' Interrogation
A 542-page report concludes that prominent psychologists worked closely with the C.I.A. to blunt dissent inside the agency over an interrogation program that is now known to have included torture. It also finds that officials at the American Psychological Association colluded with the Pentagon to make sure the association's ethics policies did not hinder the ability of psychologists to be involved in the interrogation program.
[/SIZE][/URL][This is interesting - I don't believe that as many people as the 'hounds of shite' would like me to think - ie. everyone, are pathologically psychotic sadistic nutters - I get masses of references to that effect, & also 'msgs' about 'cops' standing by 'cops', and their being inclined to keep schtumm in the face of what they see that aren't right. I think this is where an awful lot of that picture they paint of 'you' - and throw you at, comes-in; a propagandist disinfo-smear of mud-slinging-for-effect, but it's grossly distorted, juxtaposed, orchestrated & fabricated, where figments of crazy peoples imaginations and shit-bucket lists are taken as some realisation of a loonies actualité - but it works... - 180days & nights of excruciating pain, & well within the measure of that fact - for purpose of breaking the will, towards murder by induced/directed suicide]
The association's ethics office "prioritized the protection of psychologists even those who might have engaged in unethical behavior above the protection of the public," the report said.
Two former presidents of the psychological association were on a C.I.A. advisory committee, the report found. One of them gave the agency an opinion that sleep deprivation did not constitute torture, and later held a small ownership stake in a consulting company founded by two men who oversaw the agency's interrogation program, it said.
The association's ethics director, Stephen Behnke, coordinated the group's public policy statements on interrogations with a top military psychologist, the report said, and then received a Pentagon contract to help train interrogators while he was working at the association, without the knowledge of the association's board. Mr. Behnke did not respond to a request for comment.
The report, which was obtained by The New York Times and has not previously been made public, is the result of a seven-month investigation by a team led by David Hoffman, a Chicago lawyer with the firm Sidley Austin at the request of the psychology association's board.
After the Hoffman report was made public on Friday, the American Psychological Association issued [size=12]an apology[/SIZE].
"The actions, policies and lack of independence from government influence described in the Hoffman report represented a failure to live up to our core values," Nadine Kaslow, a former president of the organization, said in a statement. "We profoundly regret and apologize for the behavior and the consequences that ensued."
The association said it was considering proposals to prohibit psychologists from participating in interrogations and to modify its ethics policies, among other changes.
The involvement of psychologists in the interrogation programs has been a source of contention within the profession for years. [size=12]Another report[/SIZE], issued in April by several critics of the association, came to similar conclusions. But Mr. Hoffman's report is by far the most detailed look yet into the crucial roles played by behavioral scientists, especially top officials at the American Psychological Association and some of the most prominent figures in the profession, in the interrogation programs. It also shows that the collaboration was much more extensive than was previously known.
A [size=12]report[/SIZE] last December by the Senate Intelligence Committee detailed the brutality of some of the C.I.A.'s interrogation methods, but by focusing on the role of psychologists, Mr. Hoffman's report provides new details, and can be seen as a companion to the Senate report.
The C.I.A. and the Pentagon both conducted harsh interrogations during the administration of President George W. Bush, although the C.I.A.'s program included more brutal tactics. Some of them, like the simulated drowning technique called waterboarding, are now widely regarded as torture. The agency's interrogations were done at so-called black site prisons around the world where prisoners were held secretly for years.
The report found that while some prominent psychologists collaborated with C.I.A. officials in ways that aided the agency's interrogation program, the American Psychological Association and its staff members focused more on working with the Pentagon, with which the association has long had strong ties.
Indeed, the report said that senior officials of the association had "colluded" with senior Defense Department officials to make certain that the association's ethics rules did not hinder the ability of psychologists to remain involved with the interrogation program.
The report's most immediate impact will be felt at the association, where it has been presented to the board and its members' council. The board met last week to discuss the report and is expected to act on its findings soon. The association has since renounced 2005 ethics guidelines that allowed psychologists to stay involved in the harsh interrogations, but several staff members who were named in the report have remained at the organization.
A C.I.A. spokesman said that agency officials had not seen it and so could not comment.
Dissent began building within the C.I.A. against the use of so-called enhanced interrogation techniques not long after its interrogation program began.
In about late 2002, the head of the C.I.A.'s Office of Medical Services, Terrence DeMay, started to complain about the involvement in the program of [size=12]James Mitchell[/SIZE], a psychologist and instructor at the Air Force's SERE (survival, evasion, rescue and escape) program, in which United States military personnel are subjected to simulated torture to gird them for possible capture. Mr. Mitchell had also served as a consultant to the C.I.A. advisory committee that included two former presidents of the psychological association.
One unidentified witness was quoted in the Hoffman report as saying that doctors and psychologists in the C.I.A.'s Office of Medical Services "were not on board with what was going on regarding interrogations, and felt that they were being cut out of the discussion." One leading C.I.A. psychologist told investigators that Mr. DeMay "was berating Jim Mitchell about being involved in the interrogation program," and that Mr. DeMay's objections "related to the involvement of psychologists as professionals adept at human behavior and manipulation."
Mr. DeMay's complaints "led to a substantial dispute within the C.I.A.," according to the report, and prompted the head of the agency's counterterrorism center to seek an opinion from a prominent outside psychologist on whether it was ethical for psychologists to continue to participate in the C.I.A.'s interrogations.
The C.I.A. chose Mel Gravitz, a prominent psychologist who was also a member of the agency's advisory committee. In early 2003, Mr. Gravitz wrote an opinion that persuaded the chief of the agency's counterterrorism center that Mr. Mitchell could continue to participate in and support interrogations, according to the Hoffman report.
Mr. Gravitz's opinion, which the Hoffman report quotes, noted that "the psychologist has an obligation to (a) group of individuals, such as the nation," and that the ethics code "must be flexible [sic] applied to the circumstances at hand."
But ethical concerns persisted at the C.I.A. In March 2004, other agency insiders emailed the psychological association to say they were worried that psychologists were assisting with interrogations in ways that contradicted the association's ethics code.
One of those who contacted the association was Charles Morgan, a C.I.A. contractor and psychiatrist who had studied military personnel who went through the SERE program's simulated torture training, research that showed that the techniques used on them could not be used to collect accurate information.
Another, oddly, was Kirk Hubbard, a C.I.A. psychologist who was chairman of the agency advisory committee that included two former association presidents and on which Mr. Mitchell was a consultant. Mr. Hubbard told the Hoffman investigators that he did not have concerns about the participation of psychologists in the interrogation program, but emailed the association because he had been asked to pass on the concerns of other behavioral scientists inside the agency.
The ethical concerns raised by Mr. Morgan and others inside the C.I.A. led to a confidential meeting in July 2004 at the psychological association of about 15 behavioral scientists who worked for national security agencies. This was followed by the creation of an association task force to study the ethics of psychologists' involvement in interrogations.
But association and government officials filled the task force with national security insiders, and it concluded in 2005 that it was fine for psychologists to remain involved, the report found.
The report provides new details about how Mr. Mitchell and Bruce Jessen, another SERE trainer who would later go into business with Mr. Mitchell, gained entree to the C.I.A.'s counterterrorism center, which hired them to create and run the interrogation program. After Mr. Mitchell worked as a consultant to the C.I.A. advisory committee, Mr. Hubbard introduced Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Jessen to Jim Cotsana, the chief of special missions in the C.I.A.'s counterterrorism center.
Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Jessen were later hired as contractors for the counterterrorism center, where they helped create the interrogation program by adapting the simulated torture techniques from the SERE program, using them against detainees.
Separately, Joseph Matarazzo, a former president of the psychological association who was a member of the C.I.A. advisory committee, was asked by Mr. Hubbard to provide an opinion about whether sleep deprivation constituted torture. Mr. Matarazzo concluded that it was not torture, according to the report.
Later, Mr. Matarazzo became a 1 percent owner of a unit of Mitchell Jessen and Associates, the contracting company Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Jessen created to handle their work with the C.I.A.'s interrogation program. Mr. Matarazzo was also listed as a partner of the company in a 2008 annual report, according to the Hoffman report.
Mr. Matarazzo said he had not read the report and could not comment.
Mr. Hubbard, after he retired from the C.I.A., also did some work for Mitchell Jessen and Associates.
The report reaches unsparing conclusions about the close relationship between some association officials and officials at the Pentagon.
"The evidence supports the conclusion that A.P.A. officials colluded with D.O.D. officials to, at the least, adopt and maintain A.P.A. ethics policies that were not more restrictive than the guidelines that key D.O.D. officials wanted," the report says, adding, "A.P.A. chose its ethics policy based on its goals of helping D.O.D., managing its P.R., and maximizing the growth of the profession."
A version of this article appears in print on July 11, 2015, on page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: Torture Efforts Were Protested by Psychologists. [size=12]Order Reprints[/SIZE]| [size=12]Today's Paper[/SIZE]|[size=12]Subscribe[/SIZE]