The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: A Case Study in Contested Ethics and the Public Uses of Professional Expertise

This article offers both an appreciative and critical review of Bandy Lee’s (ed.) book The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 27 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President. The book raises important questions about the ethical conundrum presented by a profession code of ethics containing both the Goldwater Rule’s requirement for practitioners to avoid diagnosis of public figures with whom they have no therapeutic relationship, and the Duty to Warn, which impels them to provide warnings when the risk of danger is suspected. Lee and her colleagues use their expertise in mental health to apply the criterion of dangerousness to the publically observable actions and behaviors of Trump. Authors also address the so called “Trump effect,” or the impact of the intersection between presidential pathologies and societal norms, including the rise of white nativist discourse. After assessing the book, the article considers its theological themes and implications for pastoral and practical theologians.