security, one could reasonably defend it even if it violates the profession's code of ethics and is personally damaging to that individual. In a controversial psychobiography of President George W. Bush, Frank, a psychiatrist, characterized the president as a "paranoid megalomaniac" and "untreated alcoholic." 14 Although these are clearly clinical and diagnostic labels that appear to violate the Goldwater Rule, Frank's view is that his book is a scholarly psychobiography, not "expert opinion" and, as such, is outside the purview of APA ethics guideline. 15 Still, the line between a careful psychiatric profile and a casual off-the-cuff diagnosis of a public figure is not so clear. Even if the intent of the mental health professional in both situations is very different-understanding the psychology of the person (psychobiography) or assailing the character of a disliked political candidate (the Goldwater case)both share a similar ethical problem: unauthorized psychiatric assessment of a person who is not examined by the professional.
Conclusion
Mental health professionals can play a valuable role in the discussion of public figures and their mental health. Their comments should be geared toward general information about mental illnesses and their treatments. Those professionals who offer their knowledge for public discourse should remember that their role is not to give an unsolicited or unauthorized professional opinion about an individual but to educate the public.