The “Goldwater Rule” for diagnosing Presidential candidates

“In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association adopted what became known as the Goldwater Rule, declaring it unethical for any psychiatrist to diagnose a public figure’s condition “unless he or she has conducted an examination and has been granted proper authorization for such a statement.”

But I’ve heard the words “Personality disorder” or “Sociopath” or “Psychopath”. So what’s fair game in terms of a psychiatric diagnosis in the new Trump world? Is it justified? Should the same clinical approach be used for Hilary Clinton? Click here for commentary from the NYT.

This entry was posted in Health, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to The “Goldwater Rule” for diagnosing Presidential candidates

  1. Sylvia Peterson says:

    How about those psychiatric diagnoses for the rest of us? What “clinical approach” explains how WE relate to Power and Profit in our conduct? What analysis fathoms the minds of the electorate which has allowed all this to happen in the first place??

    Or should we reframe the argument? Remember the Vietnam War poster from the sixties: “Bring the War Home”? Something about taking on our own struggle before presuming to dominate others. More gently: Be the Change We Want to See.

Comments are closed.