Customer Reviews

Bush on the Couch Rev Ed: Inside the Mind of the President

5 star:		(12)
4 star:		(8)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

The reader who keeps an open mind about Adult ADHD (Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder) will find this book an eye-opener and its author incredibly astute and prescient.

Dr. Frank extensively and authoritatively documents his suggestion that Bush has Adult AD/HD. In fact, he does an astounding job linking untreated ADHD symptoms with Bush's lifelong patterns. In so doing, he demonstrates that, when ADHD is not recognized (in the child or the parent), fatal personality flaws might develop from what initially were minor or at least treatable symptoms.

For that reason alone, this book should be at the top of the bestseller list. Bob Woodward's book excellently records the facts of all that's transpired during this administration, but what's missing in his and all the other accounts is the WHY. The pundits always seem so flummoxed as to why Bush has done the things he's done - as if his actions have been deliberate and calculated, not unwitting but troubling neurobehaviors.

I read the first edition when it came out, so my memory is a bit foggy about that version. But I seem to recall that edition as being a more heavily swayed by the psychoanalytic side, which disappointed me. Moreover, psychoanalytic theory too often misses the genetic inheritance; that is, that the child has most likely inherited his or her brain "wiring" from one or both parents. For example, if the mother is narcissistic, did her behavior make the child narcissistic or did the child inherit the neurogenetic tendency to be narcissistic? After all, low empathy is a function of the brain; and narcissism is associated with low empathy. Could anyone witness Bush during Katrina (and many other examples) and not shudder at his obvious lack of empathy? It was quite obvious to me that he simply did not, could not, feel any.

To those long befuddled about why Bush motivations and "persona," here are some very good answers. The irony is, when it comes to neuroscience, too many in the "liberal media" are as anti-science as some of the people they criticize in their writing. But if you're going to argue for evolution, you should argue for science as it affects the brain, too.

PLEASE keep in mind that ADHD has many different manifestations. It is a syndrome. There is no one-size-fits-all descriptions for ADHD, and most people ADHD are not like Bush or even close! But, as Dr. Frank makes clear, Bush suffers from his own personal variation of the core deficits of impulsivity, hyperactivity, inattention, and dysregulation of temper -- complicated by an unusual family situation (to say the least).

Yet, to many Americans, Bush's impulsivity and impatience at working through ponderous details initially looked like "decisiveness." His inability to accurately assess risk and apply forethought was seen as "confidence." His intolerance for sustained mental effort was seen as a "CEO President" doing a heckuva job delegating. But oh, how dangerously wrong those perceptions were.

Until voters learn to recognize the signs of neurocognitive disorders, they will keep making ghastly misperceptions -- and our country will keep suffering the fallout. Untreated and unrecognized ADHD hurts mostly everyone: the adults who have it, their loved ones, and -- with the leader of the free world manifesting untreated, unrecognized ADHD symptoms -- the entire globe. It should be a sobering thought for every voter.

So, the part of the book I found most substantive was that which focuses on Bush's likely ADHD symptoms and explaining them in light of neuroscience. The rest -- the psychoanalysis - seemed a bit more like story-telling. Maybe true. Maybe fantasy. And, on the whole, not that useful, in my opinion. On the other hand, neurocognitive deficits are a lot more quantifiable, and obvious.

Examples from the book:
--"Impulsive, hair-trigger responses to real and perceived threats are also common for people with ADHD, who often act before determining whether the threat they perceive is in fact genuine."

--"To make matters worse, ADHD is often found to coexist with other learning disorders, the most common belonging to the family of dyslexias....Because the erratic attention span, impulsivity, and restlessness that are the primary symptoms of ADHD can make reading difficult, ADHD can mimic dyslexia, but they are two separate disorders. Bush's dyslexia is not officially documented, but his reading habits are, and they reveal several earmarks of the disorder. He has said repeatedly, with a pride that might mask defensiveness, that he does not read newspapers."

--"People with untreated ADHD can have difficulty functioning as members of a social group, because they find it hard to follow substantive discussion and social interaction. Finding it too hard to grasp thoughts coming from multiple directions, they often resort to telling jokes and disrupting the proceedings; they content themselves with being one of a group of fun-loving people, and avoid more serious interactions."

Another reviewer pointed to some of Bush's foibles as possibly being the result of cocaine or alcohol abuse. I would turn that around. It's well-known that many people with certain brain disorders "self-medicate" with substances; they are thought to be trying to calm the noise in their brains and find focus. In fact, adults with untreated ADHD suffer a higher risk of substance abuse, and these substances can stretch the gamut from overspending or overeating to excessively smoking cigarettes, drinking alcohol, smoking marijuana, viewing porn, and even talking too much. Some even pursue sports in an extreme way (daredevil mountain-biking, for example) or perform other physical risk-taking activities.

Incredibly, some adults with untreated ADHD even self-medicate by initiating conflicts; the adrenaline quiets a too-noisy inner state and they feel eerily peaceful amid the tension.

Finally, it's ironic that the public sees only the risks to stimulant medications (which in fact are among the safest medications studied), not the risks from the alternatives. But the biggest risk comes from ignorance that ADHD is real, and it's considered even more impairing than disorders such as depression and anxiety.

Denial about ADHD is hurting us all - in our private lives and in our public lives.


Gina Pera

Whether you love or hate President Bush, or believe or disbelieve the analysis here, this is a serious book about the application of the latest psychoanalytic techniques.

That said, I found many of the author's examples of the President's behavior, just a bit too facile. Most of them could be explained equally as a result of his intense alcoholism or perhaps as a result of a brief but intense cocaine habit, neither of which were dwelled on at any length by the author. Thus the highlight of the book is not so much belief in the author's "psychoanalysis-at-a-distance," as it is in his comprehensive outline of, and use of Melanie Kline's paradigm for psychoanalysis.

As one who did read Dr. Henry Murray's psychoanalysis of Hitler, as well as Valmik Volkan's analyses of Richard Nixon (A Psychobiography of Nixon) and Anthony Storr's excellent Freudian analysis of Sir Winston Churchill, Franz Kafka and Sir Isaac Newton, I can say without a doubt that the tools of a serious psychoanalyst are prominently on display here. The book is worth five stars alone for demonstrating how Kline's psychoanalytic framework is to be put to good professional use.
If he had called his work "psychobiography," instead of "psychoanalysis," I would have felt better about the analysis, and perhaps would have given him a pass.

Giving the author his just due, the outlines for a sound psychoanalysis are certainly in place here, especially in regards to the inconsistent, if not poor parenting received by George Jr., from Barbara and George senior. But as he so carefully notes, that was a function of the pre-Freudian times that they became parents. And while Kline's analysis places a preponderance of weight on developments during the formative years, they are far from the full story.

There are still just too many other intervening variables that the author could not have "tapped into" that could have had an equally decisive impact on the development of the President's character and personality. At the very least a personal interview should have been required to confirm the author's findings. Otherwise these results must remain tentative and preliminary, if not just plain suspect.


Despite these nitpicks, this is a fine piece of work, not at all the unbalanced piece I was expecting. Five stars

Sometimes I think psychiatrists get carried away. This one seemed to stretch a bit in trying to explain Bush's personality. If he was not stretching..... Houston, we have a problem.
I am not a fan of Bush and his crowd. This book reinforced my feeling that he never should have been President.
Good read. If only 1/2 is true, Jan. 2009 can't come soon enough. Thing is, I don't think he will go willingly.

Dr. Frank's insights into our tragically flawed, incurious and destructive 43rd president are first rate. This new edition, an easier read than the first, is both penetrating and profound on every page, and the elegant epilogue alone fully justifies the price of the book. It is intriguing to compare this work to GWB's own just released memoir, Decision Points. It seems to me (admittedly as the author of The President's Therapist: And the Secret Intervention to Treat the Alcoholism of George W. Bush) that in denying the facts of his abusive upbringing, "forgetting" that flamboyant huckster Arthur Blessit brought him to Jesus (naming instead rather more acceptable Dr. Billy Graham), and so strenuously asserting, on page one, no less, that not a drop of liquor passed his lips while he was president, Mr. Bush merely confirms Dr. Frank's central thesis that the management of anxiety is the key to understanding the late president's essentially infantile personality. Dr. Frank does an excellent job of dissecting W's use of frat-boy sarcasm as a persistent coping device, permitting him to evade the need to provide serious answers to serious questions. Some readers might argue that Bush On The Couch is insufficiently objective, too much the polemic. Unfortunately, as history will surely judge, the GWB presidency was an American tragedy of such proportions that to attempt to be "fair and balanced" is to fall into a Catch-22 conundrum. Sure, parts of George W. Bush's heart may have been less addled than others, but no matter his intentions, W served the dark side of human nature for eight years, ultimately delivering, to America's eternal shame, incompetence, lies, cruelty--and sheer evil--on a breathtaking scale. I happen to agree with Dr. Frank that the American media bear much blame for so cowardly succumbing to the bullying ways of the 43rd administration; it might be fitting, therefore, to remember "The Second Coming of 43" a sonnet by Ethan Alter, apparently written while watching the live, all-networks broadcast of George W. Bush's 2005 inauguration address:

From heaven we look down upon your tongue
and ponder on past promises eclipsed,
as sycophantic aides you strut among
who hail your empty words and arrant quips.
For flowers were never strewn at our feet
and siren songs for us were never sung;
our mission met a deadlier drumbeat
as vaunted claims of conquest came unstrung.
Yet still you swagger, surly as you bleat,
propped by opulent puppeteers galore,
and fawning, fulsome phrases of deceit
come wafting from your acquiescent jaw.
Those words hang briefly in the air like chaff,
but your lies will rise as your epitaph.

--Ethan Alter
20th January 2005

first, the title, "bush on the couch" preselects those who will like or dislike the author's conclusions and, ultimately, buy the book. the book chases several themes, not in the most organized fashion. the psychodynamic explanations should have been based on more stories by families and friends and other observers. like in any forensic science, the conclusions should have been based on impartial observations and on documentation and actual evidence rather than the author's interpretations. somehow, that's not sufficiently offered, whether it is a lapse in the author's mind or retraction / protection of that material. in the end, i thought that possible diagnoses were proffered without sufficient justification (although i concur with those possibilities) ... while the evidence, offered through the book, through the state of the union, and videoclips all seem to suggest that this president might be of questionable competence and might, in fact, be a clear and present danger, no discussion is made of the important enablers who have propped him up for 2 terms and what might happen in this, his final year, in which he must serve out his last 300 days without the support of so many who have been loyal to his beliefs. one of the previous reviewers suggested that a psychological examination might be required for future presidents ... while acknowledging that that would require a constitutional amendment, i think that since our healthcare, education, defense, and most other areas of public policy require evidence based practices, it is worthy to note that politicians have thus far escaped from this requirement. selecting an impartial, knowledgeable team of experts to devise measures of intelligence, emotional robustness, problem solving, negotiation skills ... would be a challenge in itself but, given the fear so many report regarding the alleged incompetence of the current president, it may, indeed, be well worthwhile ... our selection of our president ought to be based on facts and performance, not on sound bites. for everyone who can get past the title without becoming judgmental, this book will stir the emotions and justify your thoughts about this president. well worth the read and well worth the price.

I'm sure it's done a great deal of good for others, but I've always found psychoanalysis to be the ultimate in senseless navel-gazing (maybe that's my own psychosis talking!). Sometimes, after all, a cigar is just a cigar. The author of this 2007 update of a 2004 book attempts to psychoanalyze George W. Bush without the benefit of personal interviews, but he has a lot of reported history to go on: the loss of a sister at age seven, a horrible trauma that turned his autocratic mother's hair white; a busy and distant father; failure to live up to the old man athletically, militarily, or in business; a decades-long drinking problem, still untreated, that may have physiological effects today; a streak of bullying and sadism that began in childhood and continued into the Presidency; and lots more. The author makes a complex case for Bush as an unhinged, non-reflective megalomaniac with dozens of enablers to keep him cloistered away from reason and reality, but the difficulty comes from what he does *not* know. For example, Bush's infamous MISSION ACCOMPLISHED strutting may indeed serve his particular psychological needs, but who says it was his idea? Maybe Karl Rove should join the former president on the couch. Bush is without question a personally nastier man than he advertises (consider the frogs and fraternity pledges he tortured in his youth, or the death row inmates whose pleas he cruelly mocked with a snicker before execution) but at the same time extremely timid (his one-on-one with an unyielding Sen. Jim Webb about the senator's son in Iraq revealed the bully and the coward at the same time). It's a fascinating stew; as I said, I'm not sure how much of psychoanalytic theory I really believe, but it's possible to conclude that while George W. Bush was president, he demonstrated deep, certifiable psychological problems -- and that his psychoses helped do harm to the country. It is much easier to read this book in 2009 than it would have been in 2004.

Bush on the Couch Rev Ed: Inside the Mind of the President The author is a psychiatrist with extensive experience. If you think a shrink can only analyze his patient you are wrong. The author analyzes Bush's public speeches and Mr. Bush's mother's book. Both what his mother discloses about Mr. Bush's youth and President George Bush himself is quite revealing. Justin Frnk, M.D., the author, also analyzes Bush's college record. Apparently the President is quite satisfied with his "C" average. Bush is also proud that he doesn't read newspapers. His men read it for him and then tell him what the latest news is, including world events. The President seems proud to be a non-intellectual. That is how he manages to appeal to the masses. I believe Gore (more or less) lost the election because the American people (not the majority) saw him too much of an intellectual, which to them was very unappealing. Overall, the book is a page turner.

Justin A. Frank, M.D., is a psychiatrist and psychoanalyst. As a psychoanalyst, he follows Melanie Klein's approach to psychoanalysis, using her model of our psychological condition.

I read Dr. Frank's book OBAMA ON THE COUCH (2011) before I read Dr. Frank's earlier book BUSH ON THE COUCH (2004; rev. ed. 2007). In his book about President Barack Obama, Dr. Frank sets forth a far more lucid explanation of Melanie Klein's thought than he does in his book about President George W. Bush (GWB). In addition, Dr. Frank's book about Obama includes a helpful glossary of psychoanalytic terminology toward the end of the book.

Dr. Frank suggests that GWB probably suffers from the kind of learning disability known as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

But Dr. Frank's most important diagnosis of GWB is that he suffers from megalomania (pages 200-206, 231).

However, the most moving and at times poignant part of Dr. Frank's book is his recurring discussion of the death of GWB's younger sister Robin in October 1953, when GWB was about seven years old (pages 2-3, 14-16, 68, 84, 105,187, 224-225, 246).

Evidently, GWB's mother and father did not themselves mourn Robin's death in a healthy way, thereby tragically depriving GWB of the kind of nurturing he needed to learn himself how to mourn in a healthy way.

Dr. Frank discusses the importance of mourning extensively (pages xvi, 15, 16, 67, 68, 110, 185, 187-188, 255). He concludes that "[a]acceptance of who we are, with all our limitations, requires serious mourning - something that Bush is incapable of doing" (page 255).

In his book HEALING THE SHAME THAT BINDS YOU (1988; expanded and updated ed. 2005), John Bradshaw sets forth an explanation as to how and why some people may be incapable of serious mourning. He says that people who are incapable of serious mourning are suffering from toxic shame that binds their emotions, except for the emotion of anger. For Bradshaw, grief is an emotion. He characterizes grief as the healing feeling (i.e., the feeling that can allow healing to occur, when healthy mourning has run its course). However, when toxic shame binds our emotions, our capacity to experience grief in a healthy way is bound (i.e., limited so that we do not mourn in a healthy way). When we are incapable of serious mourning in a healthy way, our experiences of mourning in an unhealthy way leave us with unresolved (i.e., uncompleted) mourning. Paradoxically, Bradshaw's prescription for healing toxic shame is grief work, because, according to Bradshaw, grief is the healing feeling.

Because Dr. Frank diagnoses GWB as suffering from megalomania, it is not surprising to find that Dr. Frank discusses mania in his book about GWB (pages 202, 232, 254). Because Dr. Frank differentiates megalomania from what I will refer to as simple mania (he refers simply to mania, without a modifying word or prefix), it is not surprising to find that Dr. Frank also works with the term manic in places in his book about Obama (pages 34, 52, 221).

However, after Dr. Frank's extensive discussion of mourning in his book about GWB, mentioned above, I was surprised to find that Dr. Frank refers to mourning only once in his book about Obama (page 97). But Dr. Frank's extensive discussion of how Obama's otherwise nurturing mother did not herself exemplify for young Barack healthy mourning about her own nondeath loss of Barack's Kenyan father or help young Barack himself learn how to mourn his nondeath loss of his father in a healthy way.

Because Dr. Frank connects GWB's being incapable of serious mourning with his megalomania, as diagnosed by Dr. Frank, why is Dr. Frank silent about how Obama's mother evidently failed herself to engage in serious mourning her nondeath loss of Obama's father and also failed to help young Barack learn how to mourn his nondeath loss of his father in a healthy way?

I do NOT mean to suggest that President Obama suffers from the kind of megalomania that Dr. Frank diagnoses GWB as suffering from.

However, if Obama does not suffer from megalomania, does he suffer from what I referred to above as simple mania?

What I am here referring to as simple mania, to differentiate it from megalomania, may not be uncommon in American culture. See John D. Gartner's book THE HYPOMANIC EDGE: THE LINK BETWEEN (A LITTLE) CRAZINESS AND (A LOT OF) SUCCESS IN AMERICA (2005) and Peter C. Whybrow's book AMERICAN MANIA: WHEN MORE IS NOT ENOUGH (2005).

In any event, I want to quote a telling passage from Dr. Frank's book about Obama: "Still there is no question that Obama's passion lies in the drive to heal the split he sees as red and blue. And he sees speeches as transformative, no matter what actions are taken" (page 33).

Now, if Bradshaw is correct is claiming that grief is the healing feeling, then Obama's drive to heal the split he sees as red and blue should lead him to advocate grief work, as Bradshaw does. However, instead of advocating grief work as the way to bring about healing, Obama gives big-sounding speeches that have no connection with grief work. Nevertheless, he evidently sees his big-sounding speeches as transformative, as though healing and the transformation that accompanies healing were brought about by listening to big-sounding speeches instead of by undertaking the work of mourning in a healthy way.

I know, I know, people do not live on bread alone. For the sake of discussion, I am willing to allow that certain people may find Obama's speeches uplifting and encouraging. I understand uplifting and encouraging speeches have a valid place in our public lives. But people also do not live on big-sounding speeches alone.

In conclusion, I would recommend carefully reading both of Dr. Frank's books, BUSH ON THE COUCH (2007) and OBAMA ON THE COUCH (2011).

I have never been a huge fan of psychoanalysis and think of it as a pseudo science, so when I saw this book, I had a lot of doubts as to the veracity of its contents. After reading it, however, I am inclined to believe that there is a fair possibility that a person can be analyzed without an actual observation and that much of what the author found is probably true.

The book was originally written in 2004 and examinded the mind of Bush 43 through his actions, words and movements. The current book contains the original book, plus several additional sections that look at any changes since the first book and to give a prognosis. What is contained in these pages is scary. Bush seems to have serious problems and it is a wonder we are not in worse shape than we are.

Two areas, not included in the book, which I wish the author had explored, are whether the author believes Bush will give up power at the end of his term, and whether, in the doctor's opinion, a constitutional amendment should be put forth requiring any future presidential candidate to have a psychological evaluation.

Although the book is a little tough to read, with all the terminology used by psychiatrists, the subject matter is important. If nothing else, it should open a discussion on the mental health of Presidents so we never face this problem again.

Incredible book! Thank God the reign of terror is nearly at an end! There ought to be a mandate that every world leader have a third party psych. profile before being allowed to run for high office!