Which psychologists and psychiatrists publicly signed letters declaring Trump unfit for office and what were their main arguments?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
More than 200 mental-health professionals publicly signed open letters and petitions across multiple years asserting that Donald Trump was “unfit” for office; one prominent 2024 action gathered about 233 signatories and described “symptoms of severe, untreatable personality disorder — malignant narcissism,” calling him “grossly unfit for leadership” [1] [2]. Earlier efforts include a 2017 New York Times letter by roughly 35–37 psychiatrists, psychologists and social workers warning of “grave emotional instability,” and a 2019 petition of about 350 psychiatrists claiming dangerously deteriorating mental health [3] [4].
1. Who signed: the scale and recurring casts
Signers have ranged from small groups of 30–40 clinicians in 2017 to hundreds by 2019 and 2024. The 2017 New York Times letter listed 35–37 psychiatrists, psychologists and social workers [3] [5]. A December 2019 petition reported about 350 psychiatrists and other mental-health professionals [4]. In October 2024, an open letter tied to George Conway’s Anti‑Psychopath PAC reported roughly 233 signers — described in multiple outlets as psychiatrists, psychologists and other mental-health professionals [1] [2].
2. Leading names and organizers quoted in reporting
A small number of clinicians have been repeatedly visible: psychologist John Gartner is a frequent organizer and lead signatory in later campaigns and was noted for gathering thousands of mental-health professionals in earlier petitions [6] [7]. Psychiatrist Bandy X. Lee convened the 2017 “Duty to Warn” network and edited The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump, a 27‑author volume arguing Trump posed a danger [8] [9]. George Conway’s Anti‑Psychopath PAC assembled the 2024 ad/letter campaign that published the full‑page ad and ad spots [10] [2].
3. Core arguments signatories advanced
Signatories have not all used identical language, but recurring claims include: that Trump displays a lifetime pattern of malignant narcissism (a cluster of narcissistic, paranoid and antisocial traits), persistent pathological lying, lack of empathy, impulsivity and a proclivity toward rhetoric that incites violence — features the signers argue make him dangerous in power [1] [2] [3]. The 2024 letter explicitly stated “symptoms of severe, untreatable personality disorder — malignant narcissism” and called him “deceitful, destructive, deluded, and dangerous” [1]. Earlier signers in 2017 said his “speech and actions” showed an inability to empathize and distortions of reality that made him “incapable of serving safely as president” [5].
4. Method and ethical debates: diagnosis vs. warning
Signers often framed their statements as a “duty to warn” rather than a formal clinical diagnosis; some signatories said they were using observable public behavior to alert citizens of risk [9] [11]. That stance has collided with the American Psychiatric Association’s Goldwater Rule, which discourages diagnosing public figures without direct examination. Critics like Allen Frances argued such public diagnoses are unethical and that Trump lacks required diagnostic criteria such as distress and impairment; defenders replied that public safety can supersede diagnostic convention [12] [13].
5. Varied professional perspectives and internal disagreement
Reporting shows significant disagreement within the mental‑health community. Some psychiatrists and psychologists signed warnings; others publicly condemned the practice of diagnosing from afar [12] [14]. The Dangerous Case contributors themselves showed divergence about exact labels even while agreeing that Trump posed dangers [9]. Scientific American and Psychiatric Times coverage documented both the petitioners’ arguments and the pushback from established psychiatric authorities [12] [15].
6. Political context and potential agendas
Several high‑profile letters and campaigns had political ties or sponsors: the 2024 open‑letter ad was run by Anti‑Psychopath PAC, led by George Conway, and appeared as a paid New York Times ad and broadcast spots — an explicitly political medium [10] [2]. That creates an implicit agenda: some clinicians framed their intervention as nonpartisan public‑health warnings, while critics argue the venue and funding politicize medical claims [1] [2].
7. What sources do and don’t say about individual signers
Reporting names a handful of repeatedly quoted clinicians (John Gartner, Bandy X. Lee, Harry Segal, Lance Dodes) and cites counts of signers [6] [8] [16] [5]. Available sources do not list the full roster of every signer in each campaign within the excerpt set provided here; the precise identity and credentials of all 200–350 signatories are not reproduced in the current reporting [1] [4].
8. Bottom line for readers
Multiple waves of mental‑health professionals have publicly warned about Trump’s fitness for office, using terms from “malignant narcissism” to “grave emotional instability,” while others in the field criticized the ethics of remote diagnosis [1] [3] [12]. The reader should weigh clinicians’ public‑safety rationales and the ethical objections embodied in the Goldwater Rule, and note that several efforts were tied to political organizing or media campaigns [13] [2].