The Washington Post has a long piece attacking the U.S. government's use of psychologists to guide the torture of detainees in the quote-unquote war on terror. A bunch of experts and professional organizations assail the ethics of the psychologists' presence. Except this one:
Michael Gross, a professor at the University of Haifa in Israel and
the author of "Bioethics and Armed Conflict: Moral Dilemmas of Medicine
and Warfare," said that if physicians think particular harsh
interrogation techniques do not constitute torture, there is no reason
they should not participate.
the author of "Bioethics and Armed Conflict: Moral Dilemmas of Medicine
and Warfare," said that if physicians think particular harsh
interrogation techniques do not constitute torture, there is no reason
they should not participate.
"Physicians are faced with a hard dilemma," he said. "They have
professional obligations to do no harm, but they also have a duty as a
citizen to provide expertise to their government when the national
security is at stake. In a national security crisis, I believe our
duties as citizens take precedence."
