While evaluating the health of any political leader is a matter of national security, it is not devoid of controversy and political intrigue. A notable example involves former President Donald Trump’s attempt to certify his health status prior to the 2020 presidential run. Ensuring his fitness was of paramount importance due to speculations about his health- the legitimacy of his health report became a focal point. Discernibly, the question of impartial assessment came into the fray when it was known that Trump relied on Dr. Harold N. Bornstein, a personal friend and fellow golf club member, to vouch for his health.
The most striking aspect of this relationship lies in the intertwining associations between Trump and Dr. Bornstein. Not only is Dr. Bornstein Trump’s personal physician but also a member of the Trump National Golf Club in Westchester. They share an affinity for golf – a sport they have enjoyed together even outside their professional relationship. This correlation has led critics to scrutinize the authenticity of Dr. Bornstein’s assessment regarding Trump’s health.
Dr. Bornstein had previously raised eyebrows when he wrote an effusive letter extolling Trump’s superb health in 2016. This ignited controversy as critics voiced concerns over a lack of objective assessment. The doctor went as far as stating that Trump’s health was better than any past president in history – a claim that was met with widespread skepticism.
However, asserting the healthy status of Trump was not the only incident that brought Dr. Bornstein into the limelight. He also controversially released Trump’s personal information to the public without consulting the former President, a step that oversteps medical ethics guidelines, causing an onslaught of criticism.
Furthermore, the politics around Trump’s health did not end there. The footage of Trump taking small, tentative steps down a ramp at West Point Military Academy intensified health speculations. Critics argued that the strange walk was indicative of potential health issues. Yet, no conclusive evidence was offered besides Dr. Bornstein’s assurances, thereby creating an aura of uncertainly around Trump’s real health status.
In the given context, the outright reliance on a personal friend and doctor, who is also a fellow golf club member, to vouch for presidential health has raised serious ethical questions. Critics have pointed at mitigated objectivity and questioned the credibility of claims made by Dr. Bornstein.
Regardless of the validity of these concerns, the choice of Trump to use his golf club mate to ascertain his health provides an interesting take on the intersections of personal relationships, power, and politics. What this potentially suggests is a preference for, or reliance upon, personal ties that could override professional integrity or ethical standards.
In light of the above, a broader conversation on the role and selection of health evaluators for political figures arises. Striking a balance between objectivity and personal relationship is vital to vindicate health statuses, thus emphasizing the need for rules and regulations to dictate such evaluations. The case of Trump and Dr. Bornstein stands as a testament to this need.