Pope Kenneth S, Gutheil Thomas G
P.O. Box 777, Norwalk, CT 06856-0666, United States.
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2009 May-Jun;32(3):161-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2009.02.005. Epub 2009 Mar 18.
In the aftermath of 9-11, the American Psychological Association, one of the largest U.S. health professions, changed its ethics code so that it now runs counter to the Nuremberg Ethic. This historic post-9-11 change allows psychologists to set aside their ethical responsibilities whenever they are in irreconcilable conflict with military orders, governmental regulations, national and local laws, and other forms of governing legal authority. This article discusses the history, wording, rationale, and implications of the ethical standard that U.S. psychologists adopted 7 years ago, particularly in light of concerns over health care professionals' involvement in detainee interrogations and the controversy over psychologists' prominent involvement in settings like the Guantánamo Bay Detainment Camp and the Abu Ghraib prison. It discusses possible approaches to the complex dilemmas arising when ethical responsibilities conflict with laws, regulations, or other governing legal authority.
在9·11事件之后，美国最大的健康专业组织之一美国心理协会修改了其道德准则，如今该准则与《纽伦堡法典》背道而驰。这一9·11事件后的历史性变化使得心理学家在与军事命令、政府法规、国家和地方法律以及其他形式的治理法律权威发生不可调和的冲突时，可以搁置他们的道德责任。本文讨论了美国心理学家7年前采用的道德标准的历史、措辞、基本原理及其影响，特别是鉴于对医疗保健专业人员参与被拘留者审讯的担忧，以及心理学家在关塔那摩湾拘留营和阿布格莱布监狱等场所的显著参与所引发的争议。本文还讨论了在道德责任与法律、法规或其他治理法律权威发生冲突时产生的复杂困境的可能解决方法。
