PSYCHOLOGISTS FOR AN ETHICAL APA |
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
Psychologists for an Ethical APA Steering Committee Issues Letter to APA Calling for Inquiry
and Accountability -- PsySR and PHR also call for Investigation of APA
and Accountability -- PsySR and PHR also call for Investigation of APA
On May 1, 2009, the Steering Committee of Psychologists for an Ethical APA (PEAPA) issued a letter to the
President of the APA, Dr. James Bray, and its CEO, Dr. Norman Anderson detailing a list of actions we wish the
APA to take in response to the torture and interrogation scandal. PEAPA's letter is among a growing number of
calls for investigations, inquiry, and accountability within the APA in the wake of the recent release of the
Yoo/Bybee Torture Memos. For instance, see the statement issued on April 23 by Psychologists for Social
Responsibility (PsySR), as well the call by Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) for an investigation of APA and
its long-standing and close ties to the Pentagon.
For its part, the APA made yet another lame and belated attempt at spin and damage control by issuing a
statement from President James Bray on April 22 entitled "Saying it Again: Psychologists May Never Participate in
Torture." Perhaps the APA hopes that if they "say it again" enough times that psychologists "may not" torture,
then all of the pesky questions as to what psychologists actually did to enable torture, with APA's overt or covert
blessing, can finally be swept under the rug once and for all...
President of the APA, Dr. James Bray, and its CEO, Dr. Norman Anderson detailing a list of actions we wish the
APA to take in response to the torture and interrogation scandal. PEAPA's letter is among a growing number of
calls for investigations, inquiry, and accountability within the APA in the wake of the recent release of the
Yoo/Bybee Torture Memos. For instance, see the statement issued on April 23 by Psychologists for Social
Responsibility (PsySR), as well the call by Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) for an investigation of APA and
its long-standing and close ties to the Pentagon.
For its part, the APA made yet another lame and belated attempt at spin and damage control by issuing a
statement from President James Bray on April 22 entitled "Saying it Again: Psychologists May Never Participate in
Torture." Perhaps the APA hopes that if they "say it again" enough times that psychologists "may not" torture,
then all of the pesky questions as to what psychologists actually did to enable torture, with APA's overt or covert
blessing, can finally be swept under the rug once and for all...
Hit Counter:
Stephen Soldz Conducts His Own "Harsh Interrogation" of PENS Alumnus Bryce Lefever's
"Open Letter to Military Psychology"
"Open Letter to Military Psychology"
In a May 17 entry on his blog, also published as an article in OpEd News, Stephen Soldz, co-founder of the
Coalition for an Ethical Psychology, critiques Bryce Lefever's recent "Open Letter to Military Psychology." It
seems that Dr. Lefever came in for some criticism among his military psych peers after his recent NPR interview
in which he defended military psychologists' involvement in interrogations in CIA-run prisons. In his letter, Dr.
Lefever claims the status of a victim, blindsided by the attacks NPR journalist Alix Spiegel: "I had no particular
reason to suspect that she would lie, twist and manipulate so egregiously."
When not busy defending himself from Alix or from his Military Psychology cronies' push-back after the
interview, Lefever dropped gems like the following, regarding his appointment to the PENS Task Force: "I was
given a voice in this important debate. This occurred by my appointment to the PENS Taskforce in 2005. This
appointment was officially requested by my Specialty Leader. It was sanctioned by the Navy."
He also accused those who crafted, advocated for, and voted for the recent APA Referendum banning
psychologists' participation in torture (a sizeable percentage of the overall APA membership) of having the
"breathtaking arrogance of suggesting how my military colleagues should and should not practice in settings that
they have decided are or have been abusive to our Detainees."
And then he capped it all off with the following ode to learned helplessness: "In a world of terror, the peaceful,
moral, productive citizen must be protected by those who would deprive his rights by force, terror and deceit.
This is what I swore to do when I took my oath. Our enemies are both foreign and domestic." Perhaps it's up to
us to decide whether this last statement should be interpreted as an admonition or a threat.
In either case, having people like Dr. Lefever charged with keeping "us" safe from "them," (while he
simultaneously acknowledges the slipperiness of these categories) is altogether too strong an argument for ours
being a "world of terror."
Coalition for an Ethical Psychology, critiques Bryce Lefever's recent "Open Letter to Military Psychology." It
seems that Dr. Lefever came in for some criticism among his military psych peers after his recent NPR interview
in which he defended military psychologists' involvement in interrogations in CIA-run prisons. In his letter, Dr.
Lefever claims the status of a victim, blindsided by the attacks NPR journalist Alix Spiegel: "I had no particular
reason to suspect that she would lie, twist and manipulate so egregiously."
When not busy defending himself from Alix or from his Military Psychology cronies' push-back after the
interview, Lefever dropped gems like the following, regarding his appointment to the PENS Task Force: "I was
given a voice in this important debate. This occurred by my appointment to the PENS Taskforce in 2005. This
appointment was officially requested by my Specialty Leader. It was sanctioned by the Navy."
He also accused those who crafted, advocated for, and voted for the recent APA Referendum banning
psychologists' participation in torture (a sizeable percentage of the overall APA membership) of having the
"breathtaking arrogance of suggesting how my military colleagues should and should not practice in settings that
they have decided are or have been abusive to our Detainees."
And then he capped it all off with the following ode to learned helplessness: "In a world of terror, the peaceful,
moral, productive citizen must be protected by those who would deprive his rights by force, terror and deceit.
This is what I swore to do when I took my oath. Our enemies are both foreign and domestic." Perhaps it's up to
us to decide whether this last statement should be interpreted as an admonition or a threat.
In either case, having people like Dr. Lefever charged with keeping "us" safe from "them," (while he
simultaneously acknowledges the slipperiness of these categories) is altogether too strong an argument for ours
being a "world of terror."
Science Journal Nature Publishes Irresponsible Editorial Entitled "Responsible Interrogation."
PEAPA Members Respond with Letter-Writing Campaign
PEAPA Members Respond with Letter-Writing Campaign
The prestigious English journal of science, Nature, recently published an editorial entitled "Responsible
Interrogation." Among other things, the editorial sought to play down the significance of the extensive military
and interrogation involvements of the majority of PENS Task Force members, and it carefully omitted any
mention of the September, 2008 APA Referendum banning members' participation in chains of command in
extralegal U.S. prisons such as Guantanamo Bay. The net result was a profoundly misleading document that
utterly misrepresents current APA policy regarding its members' participation in such settings.
Kim Mills, the APA's Associate Executive Director for Public and Member Communications, noted that "APA
staff worked with one of the editors to provide detailed history and background, which led to what we think is a
fair and balanced piece." Indeed!
Members of Psychologists for an Ethical APA (PEAPA) promptly mobilized, writing nine letters to the editor of
Nature, which included, along with scathing criticism of the editorial itself and its misrepresentation of APA's
policy, demands for a retraction of the editorial and an accompanying clarification of APA's current policy which
bars its members from working within the military chain of command in such sites.
PEAPA encourages all interested persons, psychologists or not, to write their own letters to the editor of nature,
or to send an email voicing your displeasure over this deliberate misrepresentation of APA policy to Kim Mills.
Interrogation." Among other things, the editorial sought to play down the significance of the extensive military
and interrogation involvements of the majority of PENS Task Force members, and it carefully omitted any
mention of the September, 2008 APA Referendum banning members' participation in chains of command in
extralegal U.S. prisons such as Guantanamo Bay. The net result was a profoundly misleading document that
utterly misrepresents current APA policy regarding its members' participation in such settings.
Kim Mills, the APA's Associate Executive Director for Public and Member Communications, noted that "APA
staff worked with one of the editors to provide detailed history and background, which led to what we think is a
fair and balanced piece." Indeed!
Members of Psychologists for an Ethical APA (PEAPA) promptly mobilized, writing nine letters to the editor of
Nature, which included, along with scathing criticism of the editorial itself and its misrepresentation of APA's
policy, demands for a retraction of the editorial and an accompanying clarification of APA's current policy which
bars its members from working within the military chain of command in such sites.
PEAPA encourages all interested persons, psychologists or not, to write their own letters to the editor of nature,
or to send an email voicing your displeasure over this deliberate misrepresentation of APA policy to Kim Mills.
Activist Psychologists Keep up the Fight: Two New Articles from Dissident Psychologists
Continue to Probe the APA's Ties to the Military, and to Build the Case for Investigations
Continue to Probe the APA's Ties to the Military, and to Build the Case for Investigations
Despite President Obama's repeated calls to "move forward," his abrupt reversal in seeking to block the release of
important new photographic evidence of torture, and recent polls showing apparent deep divisions in the
investigations continues to build. Witness two recent articles calling for investigations and probing the history of
APA's collusion with the U.S. Military and its torture policies. The first is by psychologist and lawyer Dr. Bryant
Welch, writing in Huffington Post, who paints a longer-term portrait of profound changes within the APA during
the 1990's that paved the way for the current scandal. The second is by our own PEAPA Steering Committee
member Dr. Ghislaine Boulanger, who draws together some of the most recent documents and revelations to
continue to build and strengthen the case for investigations of the APA. Here are links to the two pieces:
Bryant Welch: "Torture, Psychology, and Daniel Inouye: The True Story Behind Psychology's Role in Torture"
Ghislaine Boulanger: "American Psychological Association Sees No Evil"
important new photographic evidence of torture, and recent polls showing apparent deep divisions in the
investigations continues to build. Witness two recent articles calling for investigations and probing the history of
APA's collusion with the U.S. Military and its torture policies. The first is by psychologist and lawyer Dr. Bryant
Welch, writing in Huffington Post, who paints a longer-term portrait of profound changes within the APA during
the 1990's that paved the way for the current scandal. The second is by our own PEAPA Steering Committee
member Dr. Ghislaine Boulanger, who draws together some of the most recent documents and revelations to
continue to build and strengthen the case for investigations of the APA. Here are links to the two pieces:
Bryant Welch: "Torture, Psychology, and Daniel Inouye: The True Story Behind Psychology's Role in Torture"
Ghislaine Boulanger: "American Psychological Association Sees No Evil"
U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture, Manfred Nowak, Issues Call to the APA to Abide by its Own
Policies and Remove All Psychologists from Military Detention Centers that Operate "Outside
of or in Violation of International Law."
Policies and Remove All Psychologists from Military Detention Centers that Operate "Outside
of or in Violation of International Law."
On August 7, as the American Psychological Association's annual convention was getting underway in Toronto,
the U.N.'s Special Rapporteur on Torture, Manfred Nowak, drafted a letter to APA President James Bray, calling
on Dr. Bray to abide by the Referendum and remove member psychologists from U.S. military detention facilities
that operate "outside of or in violation of international law." In his letter, Nowak refers to "the now public record
of psychologists' involvement in the design, supervision, implementation, and legitimization of a regime of
physical and psychological torture at US military and intelligence facilities," notes that these sites continue to
operate in violation of international law, and calls on the APA to invoke the Referendum, to ensure it is complied
with, and also to remove the "Nuremberg Defense" contained in the APA's Ethics Code Standard 1.02. He ends
his letter with this powerful admonition: "Every day that you delay invoking the referendum is another day where
psychologists are, by their presence and participation in these operations, acquiescing in human rights violations."
Although the APA did not publicly acknowledge the letter, others did. The Center for Constitutional Rights issued
a press release, along with a call for the Canadian government to open investigations into Dr. Larry James' ties to
torture during his tenure in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib. Also, activist psychologist and blogger Valtin discussed
Nowak's letter in the context of APA's continuing stonewalling on just the changes Nowak calls for: implementing
the Referendum and altering Standard 1.02.
the U.N.'s Special Rapporteur on Torture, Manfred Nowak, drafted a letter to APA President James Bray, calling
on Dr. Bray to abide by the Referendum and remove member psychologists from U.S. military detention facilities
that operate "outside of or in violation of international law." In his letter, Nowak refers to "the now public record
of psychologists' involvement in the design, supervision, implementation, and legitimization of a regime of
physical and psychological torture at US military and intelligence facilities," notes that these sites continue to
operate in violation of international law, and calls on the APA to invoke the Referendum, to ensure it is complied
with, and also to remove the "Nuremberg Defense" contained in the APA's Ethics Code Standard 1.02. He ends
his letter with this powerful admonition: "Every day that you delay invoking the referendum is another day where
psychologists are, by their presence and participation in these operations, acquiescing in human rights violations."
Although the APA did not publicly acknowledge the letter, others did. The Center for Constitutional Rights issued
a press release, along with a call for the Canadian government to open investigations into Dr. Larry James' ties to
torture during his tenure in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib. Also, activist psychologist and blogger Valtin discussed
Nowak's letter in the context of APA's continuing stonewalling on just the changes Nowak calls for: implementing
the Referendum and altering Standard 1.02.
A Formal Complaint was sent to President Bray yesterday by Frank Summers along with three other signers, Roy
Eidelson, Ryan Hunt, and Mary Pelton-Cooper. The Complaint was the result of work and research by the
Complaint Working Group, which studied the APA Bylaws and Rules and found a way to lodge a legal, official
complaint about the PENS policy and process that has teeth. Association Rule 90-1 require the APA President to
appoint a blue ribbon, three-psychologist Committee on Constitutional Issues (CCI) to adjudicate the Complaint
and make recommendations to the Council. The signers of the Complaint must approve all members that the
President appoints to the CCI. The Formal Complaint contains 20 specific allegations about how the Board,
Ethics Office/Committee, and APA officials violated APA rules for making a new policy, and fought efforts to
reverse it against overwhelming evidence that it was a disaster. Documentation with original sources is presented
to back the allegations and witnesses have offered to provide further information about irregularities in the PENS
process. For redress, the Complaint demands nullification of the PENS decision, full implementation of the
Referendum, and an investigation into the role of the Board, Ethics and Public Affairs Office, Practice and
Science Directorates, and Senior Staff of the APA in making and sustaining this reprehensible policy.
The signers are members of the APA who will remain members and follow through on the stages of the
Complaint process. Besides its signers, Frank, Mary, Ryan and Roy, the Complaint Working Group included Dan
Aalbers, Martha Davis, Sharon Gadberry, Brad Olson, Jay Pozner, Jack Stewart, and Bryant Welch. We thank
them all for their contributions and hard work.
Eidelson, Ryan Hunt, and Mary Pelton-Cooper. The Complaint was the result of work and research by the
Complaint Working Group, which studied the APA Bylaws and Rules and found a way to lodge a legal, official
complaint about the PENS policy and process that has teeth. Association Rule 90-1 require the APA President to
appoint a blue ribbon, three-psychologist Committee on Constitutional Issues (CCI) to adjudicate the Complaint
and make recommendations to the Council. The signers of the Complaint must approve all members that the
President appoints to the CCI. The Formal Complaint contains 20 specific allegations about how the Board,
Ethics Office/Committee, and APA officials violated APA rules for making a new policy, and fought efforts to
reverse it against overwhelming evidence that it was a disaster. Documentation with original sources is presented
to back the allegations and witnesses have offered to provide further information about irregularities in the PENS
process. For redress, the Complaint demands nullification of the PENS decision, full implementation of the
Referendum, and an investigation into the role of the Board, Ethics and Public Affairs Office, Practice and
Science Directorates, and Senior Staff of the APA in making and sustaining this reprehensible policy.
The signers are members of the APA who will remain members and follow through on the stages of the
Complaint process. Besides its signers, Frank, Mary, Ryan and Roy, the Complaint Working Group included Dan
Aalbers, Martha Davis, Sharon Gadberry, Brad Olson, Jay Pozner, Jack Stewart, and Bryant Welch. We thank
them all for their contributions and hard work.
Four APA Members Have Issued a Formal Complaint to APA President James Bray, Calling on
him to Appoint a Committee to Investigate Procedural Irregularities Surrounding the PENS
Policy, Ethics Code Statement 1.02, and APA Support for Interrogation Efforts Generally
him to Appoint a Committee to Investigate Procedural Irregularities Surrounding the PENS
Policy, Ethics Code Statement 1.02, and APA Support for Interrogation Efforts Generally
Psychologists for an Ethical APA (PEAPA) Initiates Movement for Mass Resignation of APA
Members, Along With a Formal Petition Site to Collect Signatures of Those Resigning, For
Delivery to APA CEO Norman Anderson
Members, Along With a Formal Petition Site to Collect Signatures of Those Resigning, For
Delivery to APA CEO Norman Anderson
On November 9, PEAPA members initiated a movement to coordinate a mass resignation from the American
Psychological Association (APA) on the part of APA members who are concerned about APA's actions and policies
regarding psychologists' participation in interrogations and detention in extra-legal War on Terror prisons, as well as
about APA's unresponsiveness to widespread member efforts to change these policies. PEAPA encourages
concerned members to read, sign, and circulate the petition, either by emailing it to friends and colleagues or by
circulating this pdf-format letter regarding the petition to help spread the word further, and we thank all who
participate for your efforts in this regard.
The petition states: "After years of struggling to reverse APA policies stemming from their complicity in illegal and
inhumane detentions in the 'War on Terror,' we have concluded that the APA has demonstrated such profound
ethical failures that we can no longer, in good conscience, remain affiliated with the organization....While there has
been some progress on some issues, these gains have been made in the face of concerted opposition from APA
leadership. Other cases of ostensible policy change have proven to be window dressing – improving the APA’s
reputation while ensuring that no substantial change was manifested....The APA has shown itself to be more
committed to keeping good relations with powerful interests than it is in serving the interests of its membership....
The American Psychological Association has left us and therefore we must resign until the organization is prepared
to put principles before power." In addition to signing the petition, we encourage concerned members to write a
letter to APA CEO Norman Anderson articulating their reasons for resigning, and thus formalizing their resignations.
Psychological Association (APA) on the part of APA members who are concerned about APA's actions and policies
regarding psychologists' participation in interrogations and detention in extra-legal War on Terror prisons, as well as
about APA's unresponsiveness to widespread member efforts to change these policies. PEAPA encourages
concerned members to read, sign, and circulate the petition, either by emailing it to friends and colleagues or by
circulating this pdf-format letter regarding the petition to help spread the word further, and we thank all who
participate for your efforts in this regard.
The petition states: "After years of struggling to reverse APA policies stemming from their complicity in illegal and
inhumane detentions in the 'War on Terror,' we have concluded that the APA has demonstrated such profound
ethical failures that we can no longer, in good conscience, remain affiliated with the organization....While there has
been some progress on some issues, these gains have been made in the face of concerted opposition from APA
leadership. Other cases of ostensible policy change have proven to be window dressing – improving the APA’s
reputation while ensuring that no substantial change was manifested....The APA has shown itself to be more
committed to keeping good relations with powerful interests than it is in serving the interests of its membership....
The American Psychological Association has left us and therefore we must resign until the organization is prepared
to put principles before power." In addition to signing the petition, we encourage concerned members to write a
letter to APA CEO Norman Anderson articulating their reasons for resigning, and thus formalizing their resignations.