Donald Trump has 'dangerous mental illness', say psychiatry experts at Yale conferenc

[BobTheCoward]

Expert opinion is just that, an opinion, not a diagnosis.

But others earlier In this thread claimed a diagnosis could be done without consulting the patient.

 

[BobTheCoward]

I don't see the words formal or informal diagnosis in that quote. Do you?

Then let's substitute a professional claiming they are making a diagnosis of a person from public information.

 

[xjx388]

Then let's substitute a professional claiming they are making a diagnosis of a person from public information.

The claim was very clear: SG said that she has the training and expertise in order to make a mental health diagnosis. Further, she claimed that she has all the information she needs in order to make an accurate diagnosis because his mental health illness is obvious; an in-person exam wouldn't give her any more information.

Her position was soundly refuted, not by me, but by citations from the APA ethics committee. Beyond ethics, she cannot demonstrate that her method of diagnosis (no interview, no exam, no actual clinical information) is scientifically sound. Her defense is an elaborate argument from authority whereby she accuses me of not understanding what I "read on the internet," and she should know because she is a Family Practice APRN.

The psychs arguments rest on similar grounds but at least they are qualified, if unprofessional, mental health providers.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I too am an APRN and I think Trump has mental health issues based on his public statements that are incoherent even on good days. However, I have no idea what kind of crazy it is since I haven't examined him. My guess is he is genuinely an ******* with some type of early onset dementia.

He's 70. Did you mean early stage?

I agree he appears to have mild cognitive decline but IMO it is complicating his existing personality disorder.

 

[Giordano]

He's 70. Did you mean early stage?

I agree he appears to have mild cognitive decline but IMO it is complicating his existing personality disorder.

Bill Bryson writes that one advantage of growing older is that he can longer develop premature dementia! Now it would be right on time!

 

[Giordano]

The claim was very clear: SG said that she has the training and expertise in order to make a mental health diagnosis. Further, she claimed that she has all the information she needs in order to make an accurate diagnosis because his mental health illness is obvious; an in-person exam wouldn't give her any more information.

Her position was soundly refuted, not by me, but by citations from the APA ethics committee. Beyond ethics, she cannot demonstrate that her method of diagnosis (no interview, no exam, no actual clinical information) is scientifically sound. Her defense is an elaborate argument from authority whereby she accuses me of not understanding what I "read on the internet," and she should know because she is a Family Practice APRN.

The psychs arguments rest on similar grounds but at least they are qualified, if unprofessional, mental health providers.

Yet nonetheless he is "crazy as a bedbug" to offer an nonprofessional, non-PC, and non-clinical diagnosis, one based on the criteria most anyone would apply in day to day life. One doesn't need professional, formal training to decide that something is seriously wrong with his behavior compared to that of people in good mental health and that given his position, this is potentially extremely dangerous. If one's uncle began acting in a similar way one would almost certainly become seriously concerned and seek to have him examined by a medical professional. If an officer on a nuclear submarine began acting this way I have no doubt that he would be reported by the non-experts around him, relieved of duty and sent for a psych exam.

Add to these "common sense" views the views of the many mental health professionals who have questioned Trump's mental health, even though at a distance.

Your own arguments here have focused on whether people other than his personal doctors have a right or an accurate ability to diagnose his mental state. This sort of steps around the key question, so please allow me to ask it of you: do you personally, informally and as a non-expert, have any concerns as to Trump's mental health?

 

[xjx388]

Yet nonetheless he is "crazy as a bedbug" to offer an nonprofessional, non-PC, and non-clinical diagnosis, one based on the criteria most anyone would apply in day to day life. One doesn't need professional, formal training to decide that something is seriously wrong with his behavior compared to that of people in good mental health and that given his position, this is potentially extremely dangerous. If one's uncle began acting in a similar way one would almost certainly become seriously concerned and seek to have him examined by a medical professional. If an officer on a nuclear submarine began acting this way I have no doubt that he would be reported by the non-experts around him, relieved of duty and sent for a psych exam.



Add to these "common sense" views the views of the many mental health professionals who have questioned Trump's mental health, even though at a distance.



Your own arguments here have focused on whether people other than his personal doctors have a right or an accurate ability to diagnose his mental state. This sort of steps around the key question, so please allow me to ask it of you: do you personally, informally and as a non-expert, have any concerns as to Trump's mental health?

I've said that I do; it's one of the reasons I didn't vote for him. But I didn't need a doctor to validate my opinion and an "expert opinion" doesn't contribute or take away anything from my analysis. If he got a proper psychological exam that came out normal, it wouldn't change my view. I doubt it would change anyone's view of his "fitness" for the position. Therefore, my view is that doctors/health professionals should stick to healing people. There's too much potential for abuse when they give opinions on political figures they haven't examined.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Giordano]

I've said that I do; it's one of the reasons I didn't vote for him. But I didn't need a doctor to validate my opinion and an "expert opinion" doesn't contribute or take away anything from my analysis. If he got a proper psychological exam that came out normal, it wouldn't change my view. I doubt it would change anyone's view of his "fitness" for the position. Therefore, my view is that doctors/health professionals should stick to healing people. There's too much potential for abuse when they give opinions on political figures they haven't examined.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Okay- sorry if I missed that! Thank you!

 

[BobTheCoward]

do you personally, informally and as a non-expert, have any concerns as to Trump's mental health?

No. I don't concern myself with any stranger's health. It is a private matter.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The claim was very clear: SG said that she has the training and expertise in order to make a mental health diagnosis. Further, she claimed that she has all the information she needs in order to make an accurate diagnosis because his mental health illness is obvious; an in-person exam wouldn't give her any more information.

Yep.

Her position was soundly refuted, not by me, but by citations from the APA ethics committee. Beyond ethics, she cannot demonstrate that her method of diagnosis (no interview, no exam, no actual clinical information) is scientifically sound. Her defense is an elaborate argument from authority whereby she accuses me of not understanding what I "read on the internet," and she should know because she is a Family Practice APRN.

The psychs arguments rest on similar grounds but at least they are qualified, if unprofessional, mental health providers.

Here we go again, you are on the repeat cycle posting crap that has already been answered/addressed.

So you are citing an ethics complaint as refuting a diagnosis?

No actual clinical information??? Try again.

Elaborate argument from authority?

This stuff has been addressed ad nauseum. Repeating arguments that have been addressed doesn't support your position.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Yep.
.

And I don't think upon performing that diagnosis you should be permitted to reveal that information.

 

[Jodie]

He's 70. Did you mean early stage?

I agree he appears to have mild cognitive decline but IMO it is complicating his existing personality disorder.

Yes, early onset Alzheimers, to be exact, but it could be Picks disease.

 

[Jodie]

You can be a jackass and not have narcissistic personality disorder.

 

[TragicMonkey]

No. I don't concern myself with any stranger's health. It is a private matter.

When you hear death-rattle coughing coming from the restaurant kitchen you don't wonder about your food? When you see a man in a pilot's uniform board the plane in front of you, stumbling and slurring his words, you don't think that maybe it might affect you? When your acupunturist confides she just has the worst luck keeping track of used vs clean needles, and everybody at the hepatitis ward remarked on it just now, it's a private matter?

Sometimes private matters should concern you.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Yes, early onset Alzheimers, to be exact, but it could be Picks disease.

Early onset Alzheimer's begins before the age of 65. On average, early onset would be a lot further along in a 70 yr old.

Regardless, Trump's narcissistic behavior is not new. For example, he has for decades surrounded himself with pictures of himself like those displayed at Mir-a-lago. You can go back years and you'll see the same narcissism symptoms.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

You can be a jackass and not have narcissistic personality disorder.

Of course.

 

[BobTheCoward]

When you hear death-rattle coughing coming from the restaurant kitchen you don't wonder about your food? When you see a man in a pilot's uniform board the plane in front of you, stumbling and slurring his words, you don't think that maybe it might affect you? When your acupunturist confides she just has the worst luck keeping track of used vs clean needles, and everybody at the hepatitis ward remarked on it just now, it's a private matter?

Sometimes private matters should concern you.

None of those are issues of a health condition but actual behavior.

 

[xjx388]

Yep.


Here we go again, you are on the repeat cycle posting crap that has already been answered/addressed.

I realize you think the APA ethics position is "crap," and that you think you have addressed it. But you really haven't other than to say you disagree and you should know because you are a professional.

So you are citing an ethics complaint as refuting a diagnosis?

I am citing an ethics committee made up of practicing psychiatrists which gives very specific rebuttals to all the arguments you've made here -and continue to make.

No actual clinical information??? Try again.

If you think that watching someone on TV is gathering clinical information . . . well, I'd pull out the laughing dog but I don't like to argue by cartoon.

Elaborate argument from authority?

See, argument by cartoon is not very effective.

This stuff has been addressed ad nauseum. Repeating arguments that have been addressed doesn't support your position.

They haven't been addressed; they've been handwaved away with stuff like, "you don't know what you're talking about." And you continue to make the same kinds of arguments without support. I've posted my support, you haven't.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Do either of you have a single citation where a reputable professional agrees with all this nonsense that there is a confidentiality or a HIPAA violation here? Might that not be a clue that you don't understand the basic principles of a patient provider relationship?

I strongly suggest you educate yourself regarding the breadth of HIPAA compliance regulations. HIPAA is NOT limited to patient-provider. It extends to any entity that has access to condition-related information about the health of an individual, in a situation where the identity of that individual is discoverable.

Now, as a provider, it's possible that you've never had to extend your knowledge and understanding of HIPAA regulations beyond the scope of your specific practice, which is explicitly patient-provider. That's understandable. Just don't make the mistake of assuming that your small footprint in the realm of diagnostic and patient related data is the entirety of it. At a minimum, you might consider being a tad bit more polite about it.

In this case, it's definitely not a clear violation of the letter of the law... but there is a reasonable argument that it is in violation of the spirit of the law. The disclosure of privileged health information about a clearly identified individual without the consent of that individual, or with appropriately granted authority, is the issue being discussed here.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

@Emily's Cat:

I'll add you to the list with Bob and xjx388 of the people in the thread that don't understand the concept of information you obtain in the line of work and that which you do not.