Ethical considerations during times of conflict: challenges and pitfalls for the psychiatrist.

Despite the advances of civilization, conflict remains in many areas around the world. Often psychiatry finds itself playing an essential role in dealing with the consequences of conflict or influencing the process. Along with this involvement comes great responsibility as well as many associated ethical dilemmas. Although bound by professional medical oaths, many physicians disregard fundamental medical ethical principles during times of conflict and situations of "dual loyalty." The phenomenon should be addressed so that ethical awareness and sensitivity to these issues are nurtured. Important factors for psychiatrists during times of conflict to consider include their "social contract" with the community, dangers of boundary violations, the ethics of media contact, involvement in governmental and political activities and confidentiality. In addition, their role in conflict resolution and unique ethical considerations in the military should be considered. While as regular citizens, psychiatrists in their individual capacity may involve themselves in political activism, at an organizational level it should be discouraged. A physician's skills should only be exploited to save lives and provide comfort as entrusted by society, and any other pursuit, even in the name of the state, should be proscribed. Rather than engage in political activism, psychiatrists can promote the rights of patients, especially if these rights are limited during conflict. Responsibility and ethically-driven commitment needs to be primary for the psychiatrist who involves himself either directly or indirectly with patients during times of conflict. Trauma and its effects during conflict should be addressed without any unbalanced attention to pathological responses.

Ethical considerations in military psychiatry.

Military psychiatrists are faced with multiple, difficult questions that shape the context for ethical patient care. These questions are difficult to answer and future efforts, including policy and evidence-based treatment practices, should aim at reducing the ambiguity faced by military psychiatrists. New research should focus on issues as diverse as optimal approaches to informed consent, evidence-derived approaches to protecting confidentiality, outcomes of care for individuals in widely varying military roles, and medication use in the field. Training for mental health care providers who deal with military patients should be provided not only in military graduate medical education but also in job-specific courses and in ethics. This should include specific training for personnel who will be dealing with specific populations, such as the US Army's current "Dealing with Detainee course" and the Army Medical Department's "Combat Operational Stress Course" for deploying military psychiatrists and psychologists.

Update on combat psychiatry: from the battle front to the home front and back again.

The U.S. military has long emphasized the principles of prevention and early intervention in preparing for and treating those afflicted by the psychological wounds of war. This article opens with lessons learned by the U.S. military through wartime during the past century. Current practice in the military's employment of stress control teams is reviewed. Updates in the military efforts in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom to prevent and to limit psychological casualties are stressed. Misconduct has occurred in this conflict; future steps to reduce aberrant behavior by soldiers are discussed. The challenges of reintegration at home, by both healthy and wounded soldiers, are highlighted.

Medical ethics at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib: the problem of dual loyalty.

Although knowledge of torture and physical and psychological abuse was widespread at both the Guantanamo Bay detention facility and Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, and known to medical personnel, there was no official report before the January 2004 Army investigation of military health personnel reporting abuse, degradation or signs of torture. Military medical personnel are placed in a position of a "dual loyalty" conflict. They have to balance the medical needs of their patients, who happen to be detainees, with their military duty to their employer. The United States military medical system failed to protect detainee's human rights, violated the basic principles of medical ethics and ignored the basic tenets of medical professionalism.

Multiple-role dilemmas for military mental health care providers.

Military psychologists and psychiatrists frequently face ethical quandaries involving boundary crossings, or extratherapy contact, and multiple relationships. A multiple relationship is defined as necessarily engaging psychotherapy patients in nonclinical roles, such as coworker, superior officer, neighbor, or friend. In contrast to their civilian counterparts, military mental health professionals must often engage patients in many different contexts and roles. In this article, we consider the distinctive features of mental health practice in the military and offer military providers several practice guidelines for avoiding harm to patients in military settings. This article is also designed to enhance sensitivity to multiple-role risks among nonpsychiatric providers.