Skip to Main Content

Printer Friendly Home > Blog

New York Court Refuses to Look at Psychologist’s Role at Guantanamo

by Kristine Huskey, JD on August 18, 2011

Did a psychologist violate his professional ethics when he developed abusive interrogation techniques for use on Guantanamo Bay detainees? Last week, a New York state court dismissed a petition which would have forced the New York Office of Professional Discipline to answer that question.

The New York Office of Professional Discipline, which oversees standards for psychologists, had decided not to investigate the actions of John Leso, a psychologist who advised Guantanamo military authorities on “harmful and abusive psychological techniques.” The lawsuit, brought by NY psychologist Steven Reisner, alleged that Leso’s advice on techniques including sleep deprivation and the withholding of food must be investigated by the agency. However, recently the court decided that Dr. Reisner did not have legal standing in the case and he did not have the right to question the agency's decision.

Human rights groups and psychologists have been pressing regulators in several states to investigate this very issue. The Reisner lawsuit exemplifies this attempt to shed a much-needed light on psychologists’ role in terror suspect investigations. In 2005, the media reported on a leaked military log which indicated that Leso observed the questioning of a prisoner and advised interrogators on how to increase the prisoner’s level of stress. Leso’s suggestions included isolating the prisoner, threatening the prisoner with a dog, shackling the prisoner and other techniques. Court documents also indicate that Leso led a behavioral science consultation team at Guantanamo in 2002 and 2003 and recommended interrogation tactics such as exposing detainees to severe cold, depriving them of sleep and forcing liquids into them intravenously. 

“In this case, the violation of ethical standards is obvious,” Dr. Reisner stated. 

Although acting Supreme Court Justice Saliann Scarpulla didn’t necessarily disagree stating, “My sensibility is with you…I do think it has a huge moral implication here,” she ultimately threw out the case on the technicality of no ‘standing.’ 

Psychologist licensing boards in California, Louisiana, Ohio and Texas have also rejected complaints about psychologists who were said to have participated in abusive interrogations of detainees at Guantanamo. Despite these failures, psychologists should be held accountable for their violations of ethics codes. Since licensing boards appear unwilling to do their job and enforce ethical standards among their members, it is time for the states to step in. PHR supports state legislatures in passing legislation that would make “ethical standards” and “accountability” mean something.  NY and Massachusetts are currently contemplating such legislation.


Places: United States

Comment on this blog post

All fields are required.
Name
Email
(Your email address will not be published.)
Comment
Enter this word in the field below Reset


Comments

Submitted by Martha Davis at 09:14 AM on October 4, 2011
On October 24 at Georgetown Law School, we are premiering my documentary Doctors of the Dark Side )www.doctorsofthedarkside.com) about the involvement of physicians and psychologists in detainee torture. We are launching an Audience Outreach Campaign to screen the film together with panel discusssions around the country to support state legislation that strengthens licensing oversight and doctor accountability. For information on the Outreach Campaign and hosting a screening, please contact me at madavis95@aol.com
Submitted by Malcolm Bush at 02:51 PM on August 18, 2011
I think we need a campaign on this issue, apart from all the other issues interconnected to this. There are endless allegations linked to all this and no investigations into any of such things.