Question:

Can hypnosis be used as a tool for interrogation, and what are the ethical implications?

Answer:

Hypnosis is a terrible choice for interrogation and should never be used for it.

First of all, I need to clarify what hypnosis is and isn’t. It is not at all like how it is depicted in movies and on TV shows. You do not become a mindless zombie blindly following every instruction you are given no matter how detrimental to you doing so would be. In hypnosis, you are in a focused state, not an absent state. You are able to lie and withhold information in hypnosis just as well as you are out of hypnosis. It’s not like a magic truth serum when the subject is obliged to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So hypnosis will get you no closer to what happened than normal questioning. Beyond being ineffective, the ethical implications make it even less viable as while in hypnosis you are in a highly suggestible state, so much like my answers on memory recovery, it’s very easy to accidentally implant false memories without meaning to. So not only will to not help you get good information, it may actually hurt your ability to get good information. This risk makes hypnosis especially unsuited for interrogation, where factual accuracy is critical. And even if it wasn’t this bad, there are very few, if any, courts in the world that would accept testimony given under hypnosis anyway.

So, will it work? No. Is it ethical? Also no (but not for the reason many think).

If you’re new here, find out more about this section on the About Ask Dr. Mex page.