The law enforcement agencies and the military

The law enforcement agencies and the military

The law enforcement agencies and the military applies different methods to extract relevant information that can be used against accused persons in the criminal justice system. The strategies used by military officers to acquire information range from conversations to interrogations that involve the use of force and torture. Torturing the suspects are usually meant to compel them to reveal important details that can be used to make further arrests or inform the security agencies about trends related to criminal activities such as terrorism. Such a method is prevalently used in places such as the Guantanamo Bay Prison, where top terrorist suspects are held (Aggarwal, 2019). The interrogations have succeeded in extracting essential information from terror suspects; however, the involvement of psychologists raises serious ethical concerns and dilemmas to the profession. Psychologists play a significant role in handling people perceived to poses important information regarding a specific criminal activity; nevertheless, their engagement in military cross-examinations compromise their professional ethics. Military interrogations involve the use of methods that greatly violate the basic human rights of the accused people and the involvement of psychologists makes them part of the infringement of human rights which is against their professional ethics.

Psychologists have traditionally played key roles in the military but their recent involvement in interrogations contravenes their code of ethics. The Department of Defense is one of the major employers of psychologists in the US. psychologists were conventionally employed by the military to help in attending to the psychological needs of the officers particularly those who have been deployed to various battle grounds. In addition, the psychologists were also tasked with supporting the families of military officers since they also suffer mentally due to worries about their loved ones or losing one of their family members in combat. The roles of psychologists have been expanding with time and the professionals have always wished to be more involved and expand their roles in the military. The fight against terrorist groups specifically after the 9/11 attacks on the US intensified and the country’s leadership introduced a raft of measures to combat terrorism (Aggarwal, 2019). One of such methods to deal with terrorism was the introduction of the Guantanamo Bay prison, where terrorist suspects are held and questioned to give key information about their activities. Such interrogations by the military are marked with severe violation of human rights because it mainly involves torturing of suspects and subjecting them to inhabitable conditions. The controversy regarding the involvement of psychologists in military interventions is based on the fact that the specialists are engaging in activities that amount to infringement of human rights; which also violates what their profession advocates for and safeguard.

The Guantanamo Bay prison is a case study that reveals the adverse violation of the rights of prisoners by the military. The fact that military psychologists are also based at the facility and participate in the extraction of information through methods of torture suggest that they are also engaged in infringing human rights. The establishment of the prison by the Bush administration was viewed as a step to detain dangerous suspects and be treated like other prisoners in the US (James & Pulley, 2013). Nonetheless, the war-prisoner status given to the prisoners made them less entitled to basic human rights. As such, the prisoners are handled in a manner that is against the international norms of human rights. Psychologists usually participate by advising the torturers about the most appropriate methods that can be used to compel the suspects give information.

Psychologists are supposed to take care of the mental stability of people but they play the contrary of what they are supposed to do. Under the advice of some psychologists working in the military, the suspects are normally placed in isolated dark rooms where they stay fir months without interacting with people apart from their torturers and interrogators (Englander, 2004). The solitude is meant to torture the prisoners and make them compromise their hard stances against giving information that can lead to the arrest of their accomplices. Most of the terror suspects held in Guantanamo Bay are jihadists who cannot give information under usual circumstances; hence, the psychologists propose methods that should be used to ensure that the detainees speak out regarding their engagement in terrorist activities (Aggarwal, 2019). Segregating such people in rooms that are usually characterized with inhabitable conditions is considered effective in making them become more submissive go the interrogators and give all the relevant information needed. Instead of stabilizing the metal condition of the detainees as it should according to the American Psychological Association, the detained individuals are mentally destabilized. Some of the advises given by psychologists taking part in the military interrogations include seating in a swivel chair and keeping them awake for long time (James & Pulley, 2013). The methods are normally designed to weaken the psychology of the suspects as much as possible to give information perceived significant in making progress with regard to mitigating future terrorist attacks.

Psychologists in the military also advise interrogators in the military to engage in extreme measures such beating and use of electrical shocks on detainees. The US military has trained specialists that specifically deal with torturing the detainees. Such methods particularly the use of electrical shocks on people have resulted in inflicting serious injuries on the people and most of them might not live normally even after being released (Borkosky & Smith, 2015). The international human rights is against the methods that are commonly applied in such detention centers and the US is adversely mentioned by global organizations that advocate for protection of human rights. The role of the psychologists in torturing detainees has resulted in a debate about the roe of psychologists in the military.

The participation of psychologists in military torturing has placed psychologists at the American Association of Psychologists in an ethical dilemma. The enrollment of psychologists in the armed forces helped in widening their scope of roles in the society (Englander, 2004). Psychologists wanted to get involved as much as possible in the interrogation processes in the military but their position has depicted them in a negative manner. The specific role of the psychological officers in the interrogation process has always remained a secrete since it is against what the public expects of them (Borkosky & Smith, 2015). Despite the fact that the psychological officers participating in military interrogations comprehend that what they do is against their ethical code, they still engage unprofessional conducts because that is what the military requires them to do.

The military policy demands total loyalty from their officers and psychologists are expected to adhere to the policy. The violation of their ethical conducts through participation in military interrogations is inevitable because they pledge loyalty to enabling their country achieve the objective of ensuring security for its citizens. Extracting critical information from the terror suspects through torture and interrogation helps in identifying potential attackers as well as putting in place right measures to thwart similar attacks in the future (James & Pulley, 2013). The situation subjects the psychologists to dilemma situations that requires them to choose between playing their roles per the military needs and observing integrity with regard to their profession.

Nevertheless, the participation of psychologists in military interrogations is also fundamental because it helps in getting important information concerning the operations of armed groups. The other side of the controversy surrounding the role of psychologists in military interrogations is based on the point that the involvement of the officers has helped in enabling the military acquire critical information from suspects and use it to mitigate similar attacks. Even though the use of psychologists in questioning detainees lead them in engaging in actions that contravene their ethical code, they have been key in meeting the objectives of the interrogations (James & Pulley, 2013).

Military interrogation are designed to extract important information from suspects and involves massive violation of human rights. The participation of psychologists in military interrogations compromises the code of ethics of psychologists because they become part of the violations. The enrollment of psychologists in the armed forces gave them an opportunity to extent the scope of their roles in in the country; nonetheless, it has tainted the profession because psychologists have been involved in the psychological destabilization of detainees. Psychologists working in the military participate by advising the army on the methods that they should use to maximize chances of getting important information from suspects. The role of the professions places them in a dilemma situation between enabling the military achieve its objectives and observing their ethical codes.