O’Mara’s article starts out citing recent updates about the torture of suspected terrorists during the Bush administration. It then details the theory behind the use of torture, explaining ‘folk psychology’ is the foundation that supports it. Citing that when normal interrogation fails, the next step in obtaining crucial information is spending an extended period of time (up to six months and longer) psychologically and physically torturing the subject and that stress holds no effect over memory. The goal of this is, the subject will tell the truth that the interrogator seeks, to escape the unpleasant situation withholding it puts them in. At the same time it points out the scientifically opposing views of more recent studies on mental prepossessing and the adverse effects that torture inflicts on an individual, which in turn irreparably damages the credibility of any information gathered through such methods. It continues, detailing the opposing points while citing the lack of supporting evidence on the pro-torture side. This article explains how prolonged stress, pain, starvation and sleep deprivation can cause severe damage to the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex, the brain’s main sectors, regarding memory and stress reactions. There are studies that show temporary stress to these areas can be helpful in the self preservation sense, but prolonged stress can permanently damage these areas of the brain. Memory loss, false memories, hypersensitivity to stress, depression, impaired learning and damage to verbal recall abilities are all attributed as lasting effects of torture. Reinforcing, that due to all of these effects, any information gained through torture is no longer credible. Even the subject’s may believe they are telling the truth, when actually lying. This is because their brain’s attempt to find safety from said torture by telling the interrogators what they want to hear, starts to form false memories, due to stress induced damage to the memory sectors of the brain. I agree with the message this article is presenting, and the scientific evidence put forth has more credibility then any pro-torture studies I’ve found. Though I feel that the author gave the impression that pro-torture viewpoints were lacking in supporting studies more then acknowledging that the C.I.A. Has barely begun to declassify the studies related to the torture incidents cited in this article. I do not expect any withheld data to carry any significant weight supporting torture, but I would hope that our military would have more then a couple weak sources and a ‘prayer’ that it was worth trying when all else had failed. …

The impact that these studies potentially hold over medicine, society and law are a step forward in shedding barbaric war tactics that appear to do more harm to the subjects and interrogators, then they do good towards producing useful results. With medicine, these studies hold new hope for helping the victims of torture deal with the trauma they are scared with. There is also hope that torture victims will, over time, lessen in numbers, as people learn that torture is an unreliable source for information and detrimental to those who go through it. Socially it opens doors of progress in understanding and civility, and in law, it gives the possibility of torture ceasing to be publicly overlooked for the gain of ‘feeling more secure’ about uncertainty’s in life. I found many article’s that were laced with bias and agenda on the topic of torture, and articles that were a review of O’Mara’s article in which his points were expanded upon but no new information was given. The article I found by The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), is ten years old, yet still supports the likelihood for mental damage that coincides with O’Mara’s article. Independently, it points out that not every victim of torture will suffer mental stress to the same degree, some may never notice any ill effects (though this is unlikely). Due to varying external factors, such as “the context of personal meaning, personality development, and social, political, and cultural factors”, “not everyone who has been tortured develops a diagnosable mental illness.” The majority of this article was focused on how the organization is trying to help those being held in torture encampments and the types of effects the torture has on the victims. They mention being ‘broken’, loss of hope and depression readily.

In a short summary article from 1994 by the American Journal of Psychiatry in which a comparison study of 110 total former political prisoners, 55 of whom were tortured and 55 of whom were not, The findings are much the same as the other articles. The only real difference being that the sufferings of the prisoners seems less ‘dramatic’. The prisoners who were tortured were exposed to a mean of 291 encounters with a mean of 23 types of torture over a mean period of 47 months. The symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder, anxiety and depression were significantly higher in the tortured group then the group who was not tortured. However the effects, regardless the level of torture, were described as “a moderate level of psychopathology”. This article also cites how being predisposed to stressful stimulation can lessen the lasting effects of torture, as the article by the ICRC states.

The article by Medical News Today points out how there is little difference between the mental effects of psychological torture verses physical torture, regardless of a U.S. Defense Department working group’s report that excluded any non-physical abuses from the definition of torture. They cite an interview study of 279 survivors of torture from Sarajevo in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Luka in Republica Srpska, Rijeka in Croatia and Belgrade in Serbia between 2000 and 2002. The findings of this study indicate that the mental illnesses that developed due to torture were caused by the psychological effects of torture. There was little variance between symptoms of PTSD, anxiety and depression in relation to rather the victims were physically or mentally tortured.

All the credible research I have been able to find is echoing the same message. Torture most often causes some level of lasting mental distress. The presence or lack of physical assault holds little effect over said mental distresses, torture yields the same effect over ones psyche, regardless of how it is administered. The damaging effects of torture last, most often, for the rest of the victims life. Knowing the lasting effect it holds over ones psyche and that the information gained through torture is unreliable, I believe it is past time that this interrogation method be retired from use. It has been shown that intense interrogation is far more reliable and far less damaging to those involved then torture. I understand that when a person feels ‘attacked’ due to traumatic events, such as 9/11, the desire to find answers and prevent it from reoccurring can overpower moral issues that may otherwise stop this person from crossing the line. However, it does not justify actually going threw with tactics such as torture that hold more evidence towards causing harm then producing usable results.

References

O’Mara, Shane. “Torturing the Brain.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences Vol. XXX No. X (2009)

Marina Staiff . “Visits to detained torture victims by the ICRC (II): The psychological impact of visits and interviews with detained torture victims”. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) 01 January, 2000 http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/iwpList265/03046C8B7314B448C1256B66005F4DBF.

M Basoglu, M Paker, O Paker, E Ozmen, I Marks, C Incesu, D Sahin and N Sarimurat. “Psychological effects of torture: a comparison of tortured with nontortured political activists in Turkey“, American Journal of Psychiatry ,1994 http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/abstract/151/1/76

64611.php

-Jocelyn Johnson