Donald Trump and the Goldwater rule | Letter

There’s a difference between armchair diagnosis and legitimate observation, and we must allow medical expertise to inform public discourse, writes Robert KrasnerThe debate regarding the “Goldwater rule” has intensified following President Trump’s recent rambling presentation in Pennsylvania (Trump rails on affordability ‘hoax’ and flings racist attacks in rally-style speech, 10 December). As a physician with decades of experience in health policy, I believe the current discourse misses a vital distinction: the difference between prohibited diagnosis and legitimate observation.The Goldwater rule was designed to prevent irresponsible “armchair diagnosis” based on hearsay. However, Dr Allen Dyer, a psychiatrist instrumental in developing the original rule, clarified in October 2024 that it was never intended to serve as an absolute gag order. It does not preclude responsible discussion of observable public behaviours, particularly when a public figure voluntarily displays these patterns on a national stage. Continue reading...