The New York Times’ Silencing of Mental Health Experts
Dr. Bandy X. Lee
The New
York Times Editorial Board published an exceptional,
big-picture view of the current presidency with the image
that follows.
This has been the perspective of mental health experts from the beginning, as we concern ourselves with underlying dangerousness or unfitness, far before consideration of political affiliation or societal rank. Medical facts are facts, which this article does an admirable job in presenting.
However, it should go further and acknowledge, however
inconvenient, its contribution to our current predicament. The editorial notes
about January 6, 2021:
It was a day that should live in infamy. Instead, it was the
day President Trump’s second term began to take shape.
I would go further back: the true day of infamy occurred
when the same Times Editorial Board—unfortunately—caused us to
go from being the number one topic of national conversation to being blacked
out of all major media. With this, the nation went from a true possibility of
addressing a mental health crisis with a mental health intervention, to the
current dystopian distortion of reality itself.
This took a concerted effort, defying public demand and
reversing the uncommon openness toward the subject of mental health that the
media displayed—when I was invited onto all the major network
and cable news programs and interviewing fifteen hours a day, week after week.
This astonishing absence of stigma reversed course, once the American
Psychiatric Association (APA), under the “leadership” of past president Jeffrey
Lieberman, aggressively spread disinformation about us.
This was partly in response to an earlier January 6—when
the Guardian invited me to contribute a piece and published it
in 2018—which, like all other articles by or about us at the time, became the
number one article read that day, week, and weekend. I explained:
The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 27 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President [keeps] within the letter of the Goldwater rule…. the personal health of a public figure is her private affair—until, that is, it becomes a threat to public health.
We were at the height of public demand, with my book being
an instant and unprecedented New York Times bestseller of its
kind. I was eventually invited to meet with more than fifty U.S. Congress
members, who stated that they depended on us to “educate the public medically,”
so that they could “intervene politically”—and indeed a Congressional bill was
rapidly gaining ground. This bill would have created an “other body” that
included psychiatrists, to replace the cabinet for implementing the
Twenty-Fifth Amendment, a provision for a president who is unable to perform
the duties of office.
To this day I am convinced that, without the intervention of
the APA and the Times, we would have succeeded in having a
rational, mental health intervention for a mental health problem. And instead
of becoming the most bewildering “Banana Republic” the world has seen, we would
have been globally praised for handling a difficult situation, setting
standards for other nations.














