Abstract
The process of innovation through adaption and use is impacted by multiple turns in the road, many of which result in unseen and unintended consequences. While this is important to civilian applications, it is especially important when these consequences are experienced by military organizations which are tasked with the immediate responsibility to project violence on behalf of the state. Traditional constraints within military culture include the law of war, the warrior ethic, and the relationships which have traditionally been forged between soldiers and their leaders. Emerging technologies challenge these constraints and threaten traditional military efficacy itself.
-
Part one: What does it mean to be a warrior?
-
Part two: What does it mean to be a civilian?
-
Part three: Consensual risk? Soldiers, uncertain technology, and informed consent
-
Part four: The intersection of military and civilian professional standards of care
-
Part five: Dependence on cyber technology
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Note
Read Bain, “Technology and State Government,” American Sociological Review 2 (December 1937), 860.
Simon Young, Designer Evolution, a Transhumanist Manifesto (New York: Prometheus Books, 2006), 38.
Ray Kurzweil, The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology (New York: Penguin Books, 2006), 11.
Bernard Steigler. Technics and Time, 1: The Fault of Epimentheus (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998), 17.
John McManus, Sumeru G. Mehta, Arnette R. McClinton, Robert A. DeLorenzo, Toney W. Baskin, “Informed Consent and Ethical Issues in Military Medical Research.” U.S. Army Academy of Emergency Medicine, vol. 12, no. 11 (November 2005), 1121.
American Patriot Friends Network, “Secret U.S. Human Biological Experimentation,” May 2004, retrieved at http://www.apfn.org/apfn/experiment.htm, November 25, 2009; see also Howard L. Rosenberg, Atomic Soldiers: American Victims of Nuclear Experiments (Boston: Beacon Press, 1980).
George J. Annas, Michael. A. Grodin, The Nazi Doctors and the Nuremberg Code: Human Rights in Human Experimentation (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992), reprinted from Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals Under Control Council Law No. 10. U.S. Government Printing Office: Washington D.C., 1949,181–82.
Jessica Wolfendale, Steve Clarke, “Paternalism, Consent, and the Use of Experimental Drugs in the Military.” Journal of Medicine & Philosophy, vol. 33, issue 4 (August 2008), 337–45.
Susan E. Lederer, “Chpt 17, The Cold War and Beyond: Covert and Deceptive American Medical Experimentation,” in Military Medical Ethics, vol. 2. Boden Institute, Office of the Surgeon General, Washington, DC (2003).
See generally Senate Armed Services Committee Inquiry Into the Treatment of Detainees in U.S. Custody; Committee of the Red Cross Report, retrieved at http://www.nybooks.com/ircr-report.pdf November 25, 2009; Physicians for Human Rights, White Paper, “Broken Laws, Broken Lives” (November 28, 2007); Sheri Fink, “U.S. Medical Personnel and Interrogations: What Do We Know? What Don’t We Know?” ProPublica (April 9, 2009); Steven Miles, Oath Betrayed: Torture, Medical Complicity and the War on Terror. 2006 and “Military Medicine and Human Rights,” The Lancet, v. 364, Issue 9448 (November 20, 2004), 1851–52. All the above and many others have taken the position that psychologists complicit in the interrogation activities generally are in violation of the APAs ethical code: “Psychologists strive to benefit those with whom they work and take care to do no harm,” cited in Stephen Soldz, “Ending the Psychological Mind Games on Detainees,” Op-Ed Boston Globe, August, 14, 2008, retrieved at http://brokenlives.info/?tag=psychologists, November 30, 2009; but see Michael L. Gross, Bioethics and Armed Conflict, Moral Dilemmas of Medicine and War (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2006), “the contemporary dilemma of torture and ill-treatment sets lives of some against the self-esteem of others… If doctors remain convinced that interrogational torture could save more lives than other forms of interrogations, avoids unnecessary harm and only targets those who have forfeited their right to self-esteem, they may consider providing facilitating medical care during an interrogation,” 220.
J.N. Mathis, The JOE 2010, Joint Operating Environment (US Joint Forces Command: February 18, 2010), retrieved at www.jfcom.mil, October 20, 2010.
William Lynn III, “Defending a New Domain, The Pentagon’s Cyberstrategy,” Foreign Affairs, vol. 89, no. 5 (September/October 2010), 97.
Michael L. Gross, Moral Dilemmas of Modern War, Torture, Assassination, and Blackmail in an Age of Asymmetric Conflict (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 2–3.
The White House, The National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace (Washington, DC: The White House, February 2003), xi.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2014 Richard Michael O’Meara
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
O’Meara, R.M. (2014). Intended and Unanticipated Consequences. In: Governing Military Technologies in the 21st Century: Ethics and Operations. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137449177_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137449177_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-49666-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-44917-7
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political Science CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)