Diagnosis at a Distance Continues to Undermine Public’s Ability to Evaluate Trump Policies

27688553091_b07eb564ac_k
Image via Gage Skidmore

President Donald Trump’s first week in office was spent signing executive orders regarding the Dakota Access and Keystone XL Pipelines, visa and refugee programs and a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, all which sparked nationwide demonstrations and protests. Since the beginning of Trump’s campaign and more frequently over the past week, media outlets and select “experts”  have been gaining attention by diagnosing Trump with various mental or personality disorders. However, is it ethical for experts in psychology and psychiatry to offer professionals diagnoses of Trump and what are the political implications?

A recent article published in U.S. News & World Report titled, “Temperament Tantrum,” featured a professional assessment of the 45h President from John D. Gartner, a practicing psychotherapist who previously taught psychiatric residents at Johns Hopkins University. Gartner told U.S. News & World Report that Trump has “malignant narcissism,” an incurable narcissistic personality disorder. Despite the Goldwater Rule, in Section 7.3 of the American Psychiatric Association’s (APA) Ethics Code, which cautions against offering a professional opinion about an individual in the public eye who has not been formally evaluated, Gartner argues that in the case of Trump, he can “make this diagnosis indisputably” and the breaking of the [Goldwater Rule within the] ethics code is warranted.

According to Dr. Celia Fisher, Professor of Psychology and Director of the Fordham University Center for Ethics Education, however, such misleading statements by mental health professionals “helps the Trump administration hide their strategic intent to undermine traditional democratic principles under the guise of a President whose impulses often get the better of him.”

As former Chair of the American Psychological Association’s (APA) Task Force that created the most recent APA Ethics Code, Dr. Fisher notes that not only is Gartner’s diagnosis at a distance “at odds with professional ethics,” but also feeds into “public distrust of both the mental health profession and our political system.”

For more coverage from the Ethics and Society blog on the diagnosing of public figures by mental health professionals, please read “Psychologists who “Analyze” Trump are Violating the Public Trust” and “Psychologists not immune from prohibition on diagnosing famous figures.

Celia B. Fisher, Ph.D. is the Fordham University Marie Ward Doty University Chair in Ethics and Director of the Center for Ethics Education. In addition to chairing the 2002 revision of the American Psychological Association’s Ethics Code, Fisher’s  Decoding the Ethics Code: A Practical Guide for Psychologists, is now in its fourth edition from Sage Publications.

Fordham University’s Dr. Celia B. Fisher on Bystander Apathy

 

trump_has_made_america_hate_again
Image via

Since the election of Donald Trump in November, there has been a 35 percent increase in hate crimes across New York City, according to Straus News.  Throughout the presidential campaign, reported NYPD statistics of the city’s hate crime count has doubled in a year with 43 incidents in the 27 days following the election. The rhetoric and tone of the Trump campaign targeted many minorities and could be the reason for this rise.

These hate crimes and incidents included verbal and physical assaults on two Muslim women, a police officer and an MTA employee, and swastika graffiti in multiple places including the NYC subway and inside the elevator of state Senator Brad Hoylman’s apartment building. New Yorkers met for a workshop last month to educate themselves and help others by speaking up for victims of these attacks.

“When you have groups that are being dehumanized or considered the ‘other,’ there’s something else that’s at play when people don’t do anything,” said Dr. Celia B. Fisher, Director of the Center for Ethics Education and psychologist at Fordham University. “People are violent against others because it gives them a sense of power and belonging to a larger group. In order to combat that, it’s a larger cultural issue in terms of beginning to talk about minorities … in terms of Americans who are one of us.”

Please visit Straus News to read the full article, “Responding to Hate Crimes.”

Celia B. Fisher, Ph.D. is the Fordham University Marie Ward Doty University Chair in Ethics and Director of the Center for Ethics Education. Fisher’s  Decoding the Ethics Code: A Practical Guide for Psychologist, is now in its fourth edition from Sage Publications.

 

 

Relying on Psychological Assessments do not Right Death Penalty Wrongs for the Intellectually Disabled

prison-162885_960_720.jpg
Image via

Although the death penalty is on the decline in the United States, the case of James Rhodes highlights the ethical quagmire facing forensic psychiatrists and psychologists whose evaluations contribute whether persons with intellectual disabilities convicted of murder will live or die.

In addition to the increasingly familiar racial biases and legal flaws in death penalty convictions and use of lethal injection, according to Celia B. Fisher, Ph.D. Director of Fordham University’s Centerfor Ethics Education, little attention has been paid to the lack of professional consensus surrounding the validity and reliability of IQ tests in general and for racial minorities in particular, disagreement over the use of absolute cut-off scores to determine intellectual disability, and the inherent fallibility of tests to determine the probability of future violence.

“Professional evaluations are not a panacea for inconsistent, uninformed and often racially biased jury decisions,” notes Fisher, “rather than providing a fair and neutral assessment of mental ability forensic assessments are contributing to inconsistencies that lethally violate the human rights of convicted criminals in capital cases.”

For more information on the ethics of psychologists’ involvement in death penalty evaluations – particularly for defendants with mental disabilities Dr. Fisher’s 2013 article in Ethics & Behavior entitled “Human Rights and Psychologists’ Involvement in Assessments Related to Death Penalty Cases.”

Celia B. Fisher, Ph.D. is the Marie Ward Doty University Chair, Professor of Psychology, and Director of Fordham University’s Center for Ethics Education. She chaired the 2002 revision of the American Psychological Association’s Ethics Code and is the author of Decoding the Ethics Code: A Practical Guide for Psychologists, now in it’s fourth edition, from Sage Publications.

 

Psychologists who “Analyze” Trump are Violating the Public Trust

donald-trump-1332922
Image via

As the 2016 presidential election approaches, psychologists are gaining media attention by diagnosing candidates as having personality disorders, especially for the Republican nominee.  But the public should question whether or not offering these diagnoses is professionally ethical or in the service of political agendas.

As reflected in a recent New York Times article, the candidacy of Donald Trump has tempted some psychologists to abandon their unique training in mental health assessment and provide unprofessional diagnoses of Mr. Trump that, according to Celia B. Fisher, Director Fordham University’s Center for Ethics Education, “distort the values of their profession and violate the public trust”.

“Trained mental health practitioners serve the public good by providing diagnoses of individuals based on scientifically and professionally established assessment techniques,” notes Fisher, who chaired the committee that wrote the current American Psychological Association’s (APA) Ethical Principles and Code of Conduct, “however the public and the profession are harmed when psychologists provide opinions based on unsubstantiated information drawn from media reports or other subjective observations.”

There have been claims suggesting that psychologists who offer diagnoses of Donald Trump are doing so for the purpose of national and public interest. According to Fisher, who is the author of the widely read Decoding the Ethics Code: A Practical Guide for Psychologists“Psychologists who claim that ‘Trumpism’ is a threat to democracy that provides moral justification to offer public diagnoses in the absence of established assessment techniques are deluding themselves into thinking that these unprofessional opinions benefit society.” Fisher further explains that psychologists are actually in “clear violation of the APA Ethics Code and are inadvertently contributing to a political climate based on opinion rather than fact.”

Celia B. Fisher, Ph.D. is the Fordham University Marie Ward Doty University Chair in Ethics and Director of the Center for Ethics Education. In addition to chairing the 2002 revision of the American Psychological Association’s Ethics Code, Fisher’s  Decoding the Ethics Code: A Practical Guide for Psychologists, is now in its fourth edition from Sage Publications.

Immigrant Detention, Genetic Testing, and Moral Obligations to LGBT Youth: Theories & Applications in Contemporary Ethics

Screen Shot 2015-05-14 at 11.34.56 AM

The Fordham University Center for Ethics Education is hosting a 3-day intensive cross-disciplinary graduate course entitled “Theories and Applications in Contemporary Ethics.” The course will take place next week, from May 19-21, 2015 on the Rose Hill campus.

Each day will feature two Fordham faculty members from different departments presenting on and discussing different topics in contemporary ethics. Using a team-teaching approach, this course brings together faculty from six disciplines to provide foundational knowledge about moral philosophy, moral theology, and bioethics, and features lectures and case discussion on issues of current social importance.

Continue reading “Immigrant Detention, Genetic Testing, and Moral Obligations to LGBT Youth: Theories & Applications in Contemporary Ethics”

Terminating therapy, Facebook policies, Incorporating spirituality and treatment of LGBT clients & More: Dr. Celia B. Fisher addresses the ethical conduct of clinical psychology

 

Screen Shot 2015-03-11 at 11.10.51 AM

Clinical psychologists can face ethical dilemmas on a daily basis as a result of the nature of their work: clients revealing confidential and sensitive information during each session. Questions such as how to ethically terminate therapy and avoid “abandoning” a client, or how best to ethically address religious and spiritual issues in psychotherapy involving LGBT clients arise regularly in practice.

In January, Center for Ethics Education Director Dr. Celia B. Fisher gave a webinar on the ethical conduct of clinical psychology for the Association for Behavioral and Cognitive Therapies (ABCT) addressing these, and other ethical issues that occur in the practice of psychology.

Continue reading “Terminating therapy, Facebook policies, Incorporating spirituality and treatment of LGBT clients & More: Dr. Celia B. Fisher addresses the ethical conduct of clinical psychology”

Unique program at Fordham examines social issues; seeks to add to renowned faculty

Bannertest4

The Applied Developmental Psychology doctoral program at Fordham University takes a unique, multidisciplinary approach to the study of social issues. The Fordham program has introduced three new specialities: Families, Schools, and Society; Race, Ethnicity, and Culture; and Health, Illness, and Well-Being; all of which recognize the increasing need for multidisciplinary perspectives on health promotion research and interventions across the lifespan.

The program aims to increase understanding of developmental processes, including health, academic, cognitive, social, and emotional outcomes over time. To accomplish this, they are adding to their renowned faculty a position that is open to experienced scientists in public health, education and biopsychology. To learn more about the program, please visit the Fordham ADP website. For the announcement for the new position and information on how to apply, please see the ad listing.