[tanknetter]

I’m pretty sure that any medical professional who renders a diagnosis of Trump (or anyone) without actually examining them, is putting their medical license in jeopardy. Or at least opening themselves to an expensive lawsuit.

[Faith Presses On]

Yes, the article actually mentions that almost immediately, in regards to a lawsuit by Barry Goldwater for similar reasons. But then dismisses it, as Trump seems to be fair game to secular humanists.

[Faith Presses On]

A therapist in the story also questions the sanity of people supporting Trump, as he contends that they fail to grasp that with his ego he is unsuitable to be President. As I wrote above, the public is used to the egos of politicians, even though typically they try to cover up their ulterior motives and sell themselves as patriots and “public servants” of high ideals and virtues.

[hinckley buzzard]

To make a diagnosis of a recognized disorder without direct evaluation of the person, is a violation of professional ethics. Using that diagnosis as a basis for making a harmful judgment converts it into potential tortious territory, defamation.

Trump has narcissistic qualities, as do many successful high energy persons, but does not come close to the boundary of a disorder. To say he has narcissistic qualities thus is not a diagnosis and probably protected speech.

(NB I have experience in forensic evaluations but am not a lawyer.)