American Psychiatric Association clarifies its position on human rights

doi:10.1136/bmj.333.7558.97-b

BMJ 2006;333:97-98 (8 July), doi:10.1136/bmj.333.7558.97-b

Letter

American Psychiatric Association clarifies its position on human rights

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

EDITOR—Justo underscores the key principles on which theAmerican Medical Association and the American Psychiatric Association(APA) have based their position statements on physicians' participationin the integration of detainees.¹ As immediate past presidentof the APA, I would like to elaborate on the rationale for theAPA's position that would preclude psychiatrists from beingpart of the behavioural science consultation teams.

In the discussion and debate in American psychiatry that ledto this position, some psychiatrists felt strongly that consultingwith military or domestic law enforcement authorities was justifiableif interrogations were "non-coercive" and adhered to principlesof disclosure and respect for persons. Furthermore, these psychiatriststhought it was our "patriotic duty" to participate in interrogations.

This point of view did not prevail. A large majority took theview that interrogations such as those taking place with thehelp of the behavioural science consultation teams in Guantanamo. . . [Full text of this article]

Steven S Sharfstein, president

Sheppard Pratt Health System, 6501 N Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21204, USA ssharfstein@sheppardpratt.org