Manipulation of the American Psychological Association’s Council of Representatives

[bananas]

John Grohol excerpts some key paragraphs from the Hoffman Report.

http://pro.psychcentral.com/manipulation-of-the-american-psychological-associations-council-of-representatives/008423.html

Manipulation of the American Psychological Association’s Council of Representatives

John M. Grohol, Psy.D.
13 Jul 2015

<snip>

So how did he manipulate the Council of Representatives?

The pattern we saw from the evidence was that Behnke would use a sophisticated mix of strategies to either delay the passage of resolutions that would create negative implications for DoD or manage them so that the negative implications would be minimized.

First, he would attempt to bring the proponents of aggressive resolutions into his fold by “working with them” on their resolutions, a gesture with the appearance of support that was almost always taken at face value and accepted by the proponents. Once he began “working with them,” Behnke would act like a partner and teammate to encourage the view that he could help them achieve a good outcome.

Second, Behnke would then use his very substantial language skills to wordsmith the draft resolutions in order to excise the parts that were negative for DoD and to substitute alternative language that appeared to achieve some of the proponents’ original goals, but often achieved less than they thought because of nuanced drafting moves.

Third, Behnke would attempt to convince the proponents that they should bring in the division of APA that represented military psychologists on the theory that the proponents should not want to be “divisive” within APA, and that it was best to form a “consensus.”

Fourth, Behnke would engage in active and sophisticated behind-the-scenes lobbying in both direct and indirect ways in order to ensure passage of the more moderate alternative he had crafted and to avoid a revolt in the direction of more aggressive measures. This even extended to his micro-managing when invitations for lunch with the APA President were issued (to nip “organizing” in the bud) and where the invitees would sit for lunch during the Council meeting (to increase “visibility”).

In essence, Behnke’s insight was that when faced with the potential for an aggressive Council action that he viewed as negative for DoD, the best strategy was not to oppose it directly but to create an alternative that could be seen as a middle ground with enough credibility to attract support from a substantial percentage of the people who would have otherwise supported the aggressive action. And through the mechanisms set out above, he was confident he could manipulate the “middle ground” alternative to make it positive or tolerable for DoD. […]

The Council did in fact pass resolutions in 2006 and (especially) 2007 that created additional restrictions on national security psychologists as a matter of “APA policy” (although these were not enforceable ethical standards), but they were much milder as a result of Behnke’s intense behind-the-scenes manipulation, done in close coordination with DoD officials such as Banks.

The August 2007 Council Meeting

Need someone on your side to speak at a Council meeting? No worries, the APA will arrange for another Council-person to step down to give you that much-needed spot. And of course, that new person — Larry James — will just happen to be an Army Colonel who was deployed to Guantanamo as the lead BSCT psychologist.

Many individuals interviewed by [the Hoffman Report investigators] recalled the August 2007 Council meeting because of the notable presentation made by Larry James on the need for psychologists to be involved in interrogations. Several people recalled that James’s speech emphasized that “people will die” if psychologists were not permitted to work in such detention settings. As discussed above, it was Behnke who first suggested that Brehm recognize James to speak at Council.

During the course of its review, Sidley was alerted to the fact that James was not a Council representative from Division 38 when the meeting began. Only after the previous Division 38 representative, Sharon Manne, was asked to step down was James selected to replace her. […]

It seems clear then that, regardless of whether it was publicly announced, James and Behnke, and some portion of Division 38 leadership coordinated prior to Convention to ensure that James would be able to speak as an official representative of Division 38.

How the APA Neutered the 2008 Membership Petition

Not only did Behnke, acting on behalf of the APA and the DoD, neuter the APA Council of Representatives, he even managed to undo the actions of the entire APA membership itself. The members successfully petitioned in 2008 to pass a resolution that stated that “psychologists may not work in settings where persons are held . . . in violation of either International Law (e.g., the UN Convention Against Torture and the Geneva conventions) or the US Constitution.” But the resolution needed to be formally passed by the Council before it could be considered policy.

Banks sent a long email — largely drafted by Behnke — to a very large group of DoD and national security psychologists calling on them to oppose the advisory group’s report. James was designated as the Council point person and he promptly met with Behnke to “develop a battle plan of attack” (in James’s words).

After the Council meeting, James reported back to the DoD group that victory had been achieved and the resolution would have no practical effect, because the word “unlawful” had been inserted in the title of the resolution, and DoD had just issued an official report (following a request from President Obama) that Guantanamo complied with the Geneva Conventions. Thus, DoD had no such “unlawful” facilities.

In his interview with us, James said with some pride that the “other side” simply hadn’t done its homework.

And with a one-word change, the new APA policy had zero effect on psychologists working in interrogation settings for the DoD.

[hr]
APA Reference
Grohol, J. (2015). Manipulation of the American Psychological Association’s Council of Representatives. Psych Central. Retrieved on July 14, 2015, from http://pro.psychcentral.com/manipulation-of-the-american-psychological-associations-council-of-representatives/008423.html