Psychiatrist Dr. Richard A. Friedman is a fixture on the New York Times op-ed page
In May 2014, a disturbed young man named Elliot Rodger murdered six people in a killing spree in Isla Vista, Calif., before committing suicide. Rodger — who'd penned a lengthy online manifesto blaming his actions on social alienation and sexual frustration — had a history of mental health problems and off-putting behavior, including posting unsettling YouTube videos that prompted his mother to notify the police. They visited Rodger, but didn't detain him.
The author of the op-ed was Dr. Richard A. Friedman — a byline long familiar to Times readers. A professor of clinical psychiatry and director of the Psychopharmacology Clinic at Weill Cornell Medicine, Dr. Friedman is a regular contributor to the paper's opinion and science sections, having published roughly a hundred pieces since 2002. "It's a different mental activity from writing for a journal," observes Dr. Friedman, who specializes in the treatment of anxiety and mood disorders and is active in clinical research on depression. "The mindset is more playful. You have much less space to make an argument; you have to get to the point quickly, and do it in a way that's fun and interesting."A few days after the murders, as the barrage of media coverage continued, the New York Times ran an op-ed whose headline posed a question on the minds of many Americans: Why can't doctors identify killers? "One of the biggest misconceptions, pushed by our commentators and politicians, is that we can prevent these tragedies if we improve our mental health care system," the piece said. "It is a comforting notion, but nothing could be further from the truth."
The evolutionary advantages of ADHD. The overprescription of psychoactive drugs in the military. Divorcing your "toxic parents" or your "bad seed" child. Adolescent risk taking (which ran under the headline "Why Teenagers Act Crazy"). The shrinking psychoanalytic hour. Therapists' temptation to play matchmaker for their single patients. The mood benefits of Botox. Dr. Friedman has weighed in on those subjects and many others, with his pieces often topping the Times' list of most e-mailed articles. "People are fascinated by stories that explain their own behavior to them," Dr. Friedman says. "They're so interested in why they do things and what makes them tick."
Dr. Friedman's op-ed career began with a dog. In 2002, with animal cloning in the headlines, Dr. Friedman's father asked if he would consider having a genetic copy made of his beloved canine, Homer, who was dying of bone cancer. His musings on the subject formed the basis for his first piece published in the Times, in which he admitted that he'd investigated pet cloning but decided against it. "Homer's clone would look like Homer and possibly even act like him, but he would not be Homer," Dr. Friedman wrote. "Homer was in essence the relationship, built over many years, of shared and unrepeatable experiences. Cloning could not recreate the most precious thing about him — our bond."
These days, Dr. Friedman publishes in the Times roughly once a month. If a topic is particularly au courant, the turnaround time can be just a matter of days from pitch to publication — as with the Elliot Rodger piece, or a similar one that Dr. Friedman did following the massacre in Newtown, Conn. "The level of scrutiny and detail from the New York Times is unlike anything I've ever seen," notes Dr. Friedman, who holds the coveted title of "contributing writer" for the paper's Op-Ed section. "Every single fact is checked. Sometimes they call the primary authors on papers that I've referenced to better understand the arguments, so they know I'm representing the science accurately."
Pondering the reasons for his foray into the news cycle — in the midst of a packed professional schedule — Dr. Friedman says he often writes as a way to understand his own opinions about a subject. He also feels it has helped him become a better, more sensitive psychiatrist. "Writing has made me much more observant," he says. "It increases your curiosity and focus, makes you more aware of things." Another strong motivator, he says, is a desire to accurately represent his specialty. "So much is written about us and our field," he says. "We psychiatrists have always been bad about communicating to the public; we tend to be in our offices and in our heads. But if we don't tell the public who we are, what we think, and what we do, others will do it for us."
— Beth Saulnier
This story first appeared in Weill Cornell Medicine, Vol. 14, No.2.