[Partless]

The Hoffman Report: After Years of Lies, Who Holds the APA Accountable? | World of Psychology

Dr. Grohol, I just came across this and wanted to express my gratitude to you DocJohn. Thank you for doing that. I was horrified to find that there were psychologists cooperating with designing most cruel of torture methods and also sometimes supervising and training the interrogators to use them against Iraqis and Afghanis, many of whom had no connection whatsoever to people behind 9/11. So even if assuming torture as punishment is appropriate for criminals (which I don't), torturing innocent people is beyond reprehensible. That psychologists, despite their code of ethics and training, had been associated with this, made me want to cry. Worse were all the lies and coverups.

But then the report came out and I've seen good psychologists standing up and making their voices heard, some resigning from APA and others being very active in making sure we deal with this injustice and psychologists' involvement. Then I saw this article. It really warmed my heart.

You said, "I feel that it is shameful that I’m a member of an organization that has stifled and dismissed dissent, while covering up its own unethical practices. If the APA were a professional of its own organization, it would have kicked itself out years ago for its unethical behavior and lies."

It is that exactly, shameful.

As a patient it is not just the training of a psychologist I count on but also their ethics. I make myself very vulnerable and share most intimate thoughts and fears. Trust is very hard to build. Lies and deceit break trust. Psychologists need to have principles. Their actions outside the session may not be directly related to how a particular therapist does therapy, but to me it is related still very much. It shows the character, not just of the psychologist, but of the man/woman behind the role.

So just want to say thank you for your ethics and principles and your courage and humanity.

[Nammu]

Power corrupts, when the lobbyists for APA became so large it was easier for them to divide the APA into sections that didn't know what the others were doing. Once that starts and the upper level condones questionable practices and starts defending unethical practices, that organization has a black box warning and their reputation is shattered. It's not unredeemable, but it takes a lot of work and removal of all executives involved. It doesn't sound like the APA is ready to admit their wrongs and take the steps they need to regain trust. Nor does it sound like those who hire only APA therapists are willing to say they don't want to deal with an organization that should be transparent, reliable and trustworthy, but isn't.
I don't know the answer but it looks as if it will have to come from outside the organization and spreading the word of why it good to hire therapists and doctors outside of that organization.

[Perna]

It's an fight that has been going on now for some time: Psychologists group still rocked by torture debate - Salon.com

[ruh roh]

If this has been known for so long, I don't see the heroism in resigning now. Also, I think there is very little honor in the profession to begin with, so the distinction is dubious.

I admire and appreciate therapists and mh professionals who take a stand when they become aware of abuses, not years later when the whole thing comes crashing down.

[WrkNPrgress]

I didn't know about this. That's breath taking.

Are pyschologists not bound by their own version of primum nocere? Perhaps they should be. An oath to do no harm, and if they're caught involved in something like torture. they lose their license. Seems sensible enough.

I guess I'll save my disdain for those psychologist who continue to pay their dues to the organization and don't speak up about their displeasure regarding their professional organization's failure to speak up and enforce their own ethical guidelines. As mentioned by another poster, I don't think quitting years after the ethical misbehavior has been exposed is exactly heroic, but I don't think that Dr. Grohol's article was written in an attempt to garner kudos or heroic status. I would guess that he's finally realized that there isn't going to be any meaningful change in his organizations current treatment of this ethical lapse and he's leaving.

Sometimes, people believe that they can bring about change most effectively from within, and when something bad happens, they stay in an organization to fight from within. They join committees, speak up, disagree and try to garner support from their fellow membership. In contrast, some believe it's better to quit at the beginning of the exposed misbehavior, working from the outside by protesting and speaking up about their former organizations failures. Both actions can work, but in the end, if the organization fails to apologize for their misbehavior, doesn't clean house of individuals who have blatantly flaunted the ethical guidelines by stripping them of their licenses, and they fail to enact a plan to correct the misbehavior, continuing to turn it's back on the ethical transgressions, then it's definitely time to leave. Believe me, if and when enough psychologists quit as Dr. Grohol did and they stop paying their membership fees, the organization will begin to take notice and they'll correct their behavior in a frantic attempt to regain their power status. Unfortunately, I think people get into a rut (psychologists are no exception) and most will just continue to send their dues in as requested and nothing will change.

[Partless]

Originally Posted by ruh roh

If this has been known for so long, I don't see the heroism in resigning now. Also, I think there is very little honor in the profession to begin with, so the distinction is dubious.

I admire and appreciate therapists and mh professionals who take a stand when they become aware of abuses, not years later when the whole thing comes crashing down.

You make a good point. My view is that some psychologists were not aware. They probably wondered about a number of things and had their own assumptions, but when a report comes out and everything becomes clear, that's when some have chosen to act. Some still remain with APA and watch them do their own investigation but some are so disgusted or upset that they have chosen to resign. And a very small percentage (one whom I came across on professional psychology forum for practicing psychologists) are okay with torture and the role APA played so they are not even interested in investigation or anything. Which I found horrifying. And I feel for the person's patients.

An example of someone who resigned much earlier was Ken Pope, PhD, ABPP.
Pope is an expert in ethics and in my view, more aware of what was going on with changes to ethical rules of the organization. You can read his 2008 resignation letter here: Why I Resigned from the American Psychological Association: APA's Post-9-11 Move Away from its Ethical Foundation, Historic Traditions, & Basic Values

First few paragraphs of that letter...

With sadness I write to resign from the American Psychological Association. My respect and affection for the members, along with my 29 year history with APA, make this a hard and reluctant step. Chairing the Ethics Committee, holding fellow status in 9 divisions, and receiving the APA Award for Distinguished Contributions to Public Service, the Division 12 Award for Distinguished Professional Contributions to Clinical Psychology, and the Division 42 Award for Mentoring reflect a few chapters in my APA history.

I respectfully disagree with decisive changes that APA has made in its ethical stance during the past 6+ years. These changes moved APA far from its ethical foundation, historic traditions, and basic values, and beyond what I can in good conscience support with my membership.

I would like to note two examples of disagreement. First, the years since 9-11 brought concern over psychologists' work that affects detainees. APA has stressed psychologists' "vital role" regarding "the use of ethical interrogations to safeguard the welfare of detainees" and ways that psychologists "help advance the cause of detainee welfare and humane treatment." Yet in its ethics code, APA chose not to recognize any humane treatment requirements governing psychologists' work with detainees as enforceable standards.