@article {Armontrout249, author = {James A. Armontrout and Sagar Vijapura}, title = {A Resident Perspective on the Goldwater Rule}, volume = {45}, number = {2}, pages = {249--252}, year = {2017}, publisher = {Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online}, abstract = {Section 7.3 of the Principles of Medical Ethics with Annotations Especially Applicable to Psychiatry, more commonly known as the Goldwater rule, admonishes psychiatrists to avoid offering professional opinions about public figures in the absence of an in-person evaluation. To our knowledge, no peer-reviewed articles have been published considering resident perspectives on the Goldwater rule. Furthermore, we have found little published guidance that deals specifically with teaching the Goldwater rule in a general residency curriculum. We propose that residency programs should incorporate a brief (one hour) but thoughtful discussion of the Goldwater rule into their general curriculum. We recommend that such a didactic hour should introduce arguments for and against the rule in its present form. Covered topics could include whether there should be exceptions to the rule, whether the rule is defensible on ethical grounds, and what contexts exist in which psychiatric opinions can be rendered without personal examination. We hope to make the case that a more nuanced exploration of the Goldwater rule could help open a door to discussions that would foster the growth of a mature professional identity.}, issn = {1093-6793}, URL = {https://jaapl.org/content/45/2/249}, eprint = {https://jaapl.org/content/45/2/249.full.pdf}, journal = {Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online} }