Psychology
Faculty Criticize APA Stance
The Smith College Department
of Psychology voted this week to endorse a resolution urging
the American Psychological Association (APA) to change its
position on the participation of psychologists in coercive
interrogation practices.
Smith’s psychology department
joined those at Earlham College and Guilford College in endorsing
, which declares that psychologists should
strive “to
do no harm” and should “seek to safeguard the
welfare and rights of those with whom they interact.” The
resolution was drafted by the Department of Psychology at
Earlham College, an institution that adheres to Quaker edicts
of nonviolence.
The Earlham College resolution
takes issue with a resolution adopted by the APA in August
that, “while condemning
torture, continues to allow coercive interrogations so long
as these interrogations do not cause ‘significant pain
or suffering’ or ‘lasting harm.’” The
psychology departments maintain that the APA resolution errantly
legitimizes violations of human rights and undermines the
moral authority of the profession of psychology. Therefore,
the resolution states, the APA “should prohibit the
participation of psychologists, directly or indirectly, in
interrogations” in foreign detention centers.
Michael R. Jackson, chair
of Earlham’s psychology
department, is soliciting the endorsement of many other colleges.
Smith’s psychology faculty voted unanimously on Oct.
10 to back the resolution. “Our reading of APA’s
position most recently is that it is not true to the ethics
commitment of the organization, and we conclude that it is
improper,” said Fletcher Blanchard, professor of psychology
and chair of the department. “The profession has ethical
guidelines and we believe our organization is violating them.”
Last year, the American
Anthropological Association voted to condemn “the
use of anthropological knowledge as an element of physical
and psychological torture.”
Read a related
article in .
|
