It doesn’t take too much time on the internet to find people talking with some measure of incredulity about Donald Trump. Some of this talk takes the tone of horrified fascination; some of it is mocking (and is accompanied by correspondingly mocking images); and some people are wondering aloud about his mental health. In this last category, there’s a couple of sub-categories: sometimes, people are not really talking in earnest; sometimes, though, they are. What if the forty-fifth President of the United States of America has some kind of mental illness, or some kind of personality disorder? What if this affects his ability to make decisions, or increases the chance that he’ll make irrational, impulsive, and potentially dangerous decisions?
This does raise questions about the proper conduct of the medical profession – particularly, the psychiatric profession. Would it be permissible for a professional to speak publicly about the putative mental health of the current holder of the most important political office in the world? Or would such action simply be speculation, and unhelpful, and generally infra dig? More particularly, while the plebs might say all kinds of things about Trump, is there something special about speaking, if not exactly ex cathedra, then at least with the authority of someone who has working knowledge of cathedrae and what it’s like to sit on one?
As far as the American Psychiatric Association is concerned, the answer is fairly clear. §7.3 of its Code of Ethics, which you can get here, says that
[o]n occasion psychiatrists are asked for an opinion about an individual who is in the light of public attention or who has disclosed information about himself/herself through public media.
The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.