Guantanamo guards receiving a Behavioral Science briefing.
The Department of Defense authorized Behavioral Science Consultation Teams to study the detainees it holds in extrajudicial detention.[1][dead link]
The teams are controversial because some critics consider their participation in what is called enhanced interrogation of detainees in the war on terror a breach of medical ethics.[2]
Such was the consternation of the American Psychological Association that it released the "Reaffirmation of the American Psychological Association Position Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and Its Application to Individuals Defined in the United States Code as “Enemy Combatants"
to make clear that any torture and other cruel, Inhuman, or degrading treatment was unethical, whatever the situation.[3]
See also
References
- ↑
Shanita Simmons (Friday January 4, 2008). "Hard work of BSCT validated by peers". The Wire (JTF-GTMO). p. 4. http://www.jtfgtmo.southcom.mil/wire/WirePDF/issue48v8.pdf#4. Retrieved 2008-02-10.
- ↑
Katherine Eban (July 17, 2007). "The War on Terror: Rorschach and Awe". Vanity Fair magazine. http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/07/torture200707?printable=true¤tPage=all. Retrieved 2008-03-02.
- ↑
"Reaffirmation of the American Psychological Association Position Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and Its Application to Individuals Defined in the United States Code as “Enemy Combatants”". American Psychological Association. August 19, 2007. http://www.apa.org/governance/resolutions/notorture0807.html. Retrieved 2008-03-02.
