Consider the following, think about it, and share it:
For those of us unaware of this rule, it states that it is “unethical” for members of the psychiatric community to publicly comment on the psychiatric health of public individuals, of whom they did not personally interview.
So, it explains why the Medical, and, Psychiatric communities have not released a formalized public statement addressing their concerns of Mr. Donald J. Trump’s mental capacity to be President of the United States.
This is unfortunate and possibly dangerous for two reasons. By its omission, the public is unaware of a potential psychiatric problem with our President, and, may assume that there is no potential problem. And, let it be known, there are major concerns within the psychiatric community regarding Mr. Trump’s psychiatric health, and, his ability to officially execute the duties of the Presidency.
The Goldwater Rule has arbitrarily and significantly suppressed the medical profession’s ability to publicly comment on the psychiatric makeup of our President. Currently, however a petition of over sixty thousand signatures of psychiatric professionals, and multiple articles authored by those knowledgeable in the field, raise serious questions about the appropriateness and ability of him to lead. It turns out the Goldwater Rule made it “unethical” for medical professionals to comment on the psychological profile of individuals they had not met in person, unless there were serious concerns of dangerous outcomes from their silence.
Eric Levitz (New York, Daily Intelligencer, 1/4/18) proposes a fundamental question. What additional information requires a sit down between our President and a competent psychiatric professional, that all the information (public and private) of one of the world’s most scrutinized humans, does not already indicate.
Physician Forum believes that the wording releasing the psychiatric community from its silence when related to the health and welfare of anyone, or our nation is appropriate and should be exercised.