Charlie Sheen, Drew Pinsky, and the Barry Goldwater rule.
Dr. Drew PInsky
In the wake of the Jan. 8 shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, I noted that some science and medical writers had succumbed to the temptation to let sources diagnose Jared Loughner based solely on the bald, smirking picture of Loughner that became the iconic image of the shooting.
Such diagnostic claims are not only baseless and unworthy of repitition, they also encourage a false view of mental illness, in which everyone who commits mass murder is nuts, or, more insidiously, everyone who is nuts might be capable of mass murder. That guy in the bus station talking to himself, who is probably far more dangerous to himself than to anyone else, could be a killer, we begin to think.
Now it’s happening again. Although I can’t blame science writers, necessarily, Dr. Drew Pinsky, of Celebrity Rehab, has diagnosed Charlie Sheen as being in an acute manic state.
I’m not a psychiatrist, and I get it–the guy does seem to be wired, if you’ll forgive the use of a technical term. But Pinsky doesn’t know any more about Sheen than I do. Or you. (If it turns out that Pinsky has examined Sheen, spent time studying his condition and history and making a thoughtful diagnosis, I’ll retract this post.)
According to an article on MedPage Today, Pinsky and any others offering a diagnosis of Charlie Sheen are in violation of the Barry Goldwater rule, an ethical standard adopted by the American Psychiatric Association which warns psychiatrists not to diagnose anyone they have not personally examined. The APA underscored the importance of the rule in 2007 in the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings.
Reporters: If your editors are pushing you to diagnose Sheen, resist. Occupy the state capitol or a public square.
Editors: If you are pushing your reporters to do a medical story on Sheen, resist. Instead, look around for somebody in your family suffering from mental illness, and encourage the reporter to diagnose that person–your brother, or your cousin, or your mother or child. Sound like a good idea?
- Paul Raeburn
March 1st, 2011 at 12:57 pm
I don’t particularly want to defend Pinsky but I do think there is a substantive difference between diagnosing a public figure like Sheen (who has done absolutely nothing to defend his privacy) and family members who are not public figures. The more important question to my mind is the public interest in this case (and similar ones) in the first place.
March 1st, 2011 at 2:04 pm
Actually, if it turns out that Dr. Drew has examined and treated Sheen, then he’s probably in violation of HIPAA too.
March 1st, 2011 at 2:23 pm
Larry–I agree that Sheen has forfeited his privacy. Still, even the magisterial Dr. Pinsky should not be trying to diagnose a patient from a Piers Morgan interview.
And Becky–LOL. You’re right. We’ve got Pinsky nailed either way.
March 1st, 2011 at 3:39 pm
Anyone who’s ever watched “Celebrity Rehab” (I think it’s called) knows that Pinsky doesn’t have much more credibility than Dr. Phil at this point.