Never thought I would see this.

[therapist]

https://www.statnews.com/2017/07/25/psychiatry-goldwater-rule-trump/

[Robert]

Thats really interesting, I am kind of surprised you brought this up. But I would be very interested in your opinion on this. To me it seems arbitrary at best, I also am not surprised by the decision since the DSM has changed so much in recent years seemingly for no real reason other than the whim of those that write it.

[3fan4life]

Just like the MSM they are shooting their selves in the foot.

Their credibility will suffer.

[Gavin_Sons]

    

[Patrick]

This decision seems purpose driven to me. 


“We don’t want to prohibit our members from using their knowledge responsibly.”   I have serious doubts about that statement.


But, I do believe the original 1964 decision to be a 'gag order'.

[John Schmidt]

They talk about Trump’s narcissism, impulsivity, etc., as some of the characteristics of a questionable leader. Seriously? Where have they been the last eight years? The jerk was a poster child for narcissism. As for the intent of the original thought process, it did have the effect of a gag order. So what, all they would be doing is repeating what the screwed up media has been saying about Trump. 

[nomoreharleys]

Sounds like witch hunt expansion.

[..]

From the linked article

The statement, an email this month from the executive committee of the American Psychoanalytic Association to its 3,500 members, represents the first significant crack in the profession’s decades-old united front aimed at preventing experts from discussing the psychiatric aspects of politicians’ behavior.

I'll just leave those words for others to read and absorb. 

[..]

The comments section is worth a read.

eg


Mike S
July 25, 2017 at 1:25 pm

All this will do is put a name to the behaviors Trump opponents already noticed and decrease the respect Trump supporters have for the psychoanalysis industry. And yes, I expect there will be a pool on either side of the political debate whose politics inform their diagnoses.

But hey, a group of elites can now freely expound publicly and feel more elite.



Another


Jamie
July 25, 2017 at 1:22 pm

The problem here is the possibility of political bias. If one were to offer analysis based upon inference, is there an ethical need to note such bias, and should all politicians be analyzed to ensure an informed electorate? If one were to analyze Trump, what about Hillary, Maxine, Nancy, and Chuck? I would contend, for example, that Nancy Pelosi is at least in the beginning stages of senile dementia, should one agree with that diagnosis, is there an ethical need to make such diagnosis public? Or is political belief possessed of greater ethical importance? This is extremely dangerous territory for the psychiatric community as it has the potential to label the community as politically active in its work. If a proponent of any political stance is labeled insane it WILL be used as political ammunition, and the responsibility will be yours. Ask some history professors for likely results of political adversaries being labeled insane. Mass incarceration and pogroms​ are a real possibility.

One more for fun

  
    GonzoI
    July 25, 2017 at 1:11 pm

    There is never an excuse to violate your ethics. If it’s wrong to do to someone you like, it’s wrong to do to someone you hate. The point of this rule is that you are NOT acting as a professional when you weigh in on someone without actually examining them. When you weigh in without actually doing the proper examination, it’s abusing the perceived authority of your title to give weight to your personal opinions. You wouldn’t diagnose a patient based on video clips of them. Don’t imagine you can do the same with a politician just because he seems like a threat and you can make a partial pattern association with his behavior. And how are we to trust you with our mental care if you let your political fears cloud your professional judgement to such an extent that you would violate both consent and privacy? Trump may be politically scary, but this reactionary “anything goes” BS is FAR more frightening.

The words hoist and petard come to mind re the OP  

[Gavin_Sons]

And Therapist only comes here to stir the pot and prove once again how unprofessional he is.