Ask the Author: William H. Reid
Answered Questions (11)
William H. Reid
Americans (and our media & often the mental health professions of which I'm a member) put far too much weight on the "destructive" aspects of childhood trauma, and often use it to reduce one's responsibility for his/her adult life and actions. That's unfortunate, and sometimes dangerous. There are lots of kinds and levels of "trauma," of course, but most of it is important for learning how to deal with the things one will experience as an adult. Even severe trauma, from which children should be protected if at all possible, is, as you imply, survived more or less successfully by most of those who experience it. Over-rescuing kids from relatively minor adverse experiences damages them in the long run. Similarly, blaming childhood trauma for bad adult behavior encourages people to see themselves as flawed, or helpless in the face of their pasts, and to avoid a rich, full and responsible life.
William H. Reid
That's a pretty "stock" question. Anyone wishing to write my memoir or biography will have plenty of material!
William H. Reid
Thanks for asking! There are many people who don't seem to require (or want) social interaction. The "needs" wired into our genetics are fluid to some extent, and there's great variability among the six billion or so people on earth. Having said that, Holmes, of course, isn't/wasn't "most of us," but a severely flawed young man.
William H. Reid
Summer's over! (Unless you live in the Southern Hemisphere). Sertiously, folks, readers can come up with MUCH better questions than the these stock Goodreads ones. Ask away!
William H. Reid
That's a great question, Pamela (THANKS!), and one that comes up from colleagues, students, and sometimes critics of the book.
Neither I nor any of my ethical colleagues would knowingly do anything unethical in a case, or in writing about a case. I took pains to be sure everything was "kosher." Here's my somewhat long answer to your question (with the caveat that I'm not a lawyer!):
1. I neither have, nor ever had, any doctor-patient relationship with James Holmes, nor with anyone mentioned in the book. Thus there is no doctor-patient or therapist-client issue of confidentiality. (Clinical confidentiality requires such a relationship, which would only arise in situations such as treating the person, giving the person an opinion for clinical purposes, or doing something else related to clinical care.)
2. Forensic and administrative opinions such as those done for a court are not considered "clinical," and the person evaluated is not (or should not be) called a "patient" or "client." The purpose of such examinations or interviews is not clinical. I always notify the evaluee (which is what I call the person being interviewed or examined), orally and in writing, that I'm not his/her doctor and that no doctor-patient relationship is being created.
3. Regardless of the above, any information divulged in open court, unless specifically "sealed," immediately becomes public record (not confidential in any way), whether the information is medical or something else. (A great deal of the information, quotes, etc., in A Dark Night in Aurora was actually presented at the trial, including over 95% of my video-recorded interviews. The trial lasted for months, with continuous video and media coverage. Everything that happened in open court, literally, is on the YouTube and/or elsewhere on the Internet, including video and audio of scores of interviews, evaluations, interrogations, witness statements, etc..)
4. When a defendant enters a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity, his/her psychiatric/psychological/medical history and examinations are generally ruled public. That is, one can't plead insanity and then hide any clinical information from the court (which, in turn, makes it become public).
5. Law enforcement investigations, information, photos, recordings, etc., are public information unless sealed by a court. (In this case, that included many videos, thousands of photos, recordings and transcripts of scores of interviews of various people including Holmes, witness statements, etc.)
6. Some time after the trial, the trial judge (Samour) ruled, in a series of rulings related to what was public record, that even items that were suppressed during the trial (to protect Holmes's right to a fair trial) were now public record, since the case has been completely resolved.
7. During the writing process, I consulted, several times, an experienced attorney and expert in First Amendment legal issues, to be certain I was allowed to write what I did. That lawyer assured me, several times, that the book content is well within legal bounds. (I understand that "legal" isn't always the same thing as "ethical.")
Finally, as you've no doubt heard in your ethics course, "ethical" and "ethics" are somewhat fluid concepts; that's what makes them so interesting and such a good topic for lengthy discussions (which often have no satisfying resolution.) Seen narrowly, I was especially concerned with professional ethics: those specifically codified by the American Medical Association and the American Psychiatric Association. In that context, the organization code is well-published and the organizations are the only arbiters of what is ethical and what's not. It also means, in this narrow context, that the ethics codes are only enforced by those organizations against MEMBERS of those organizations. Broader concepts of ethics are important as well, and I adhered to those as I understand and interpret them. Nevertheless, I'm sure that a few people, using some interpretation (perhaps a personal one) of the many, many ways of viewing ethics, will find a way to criticise almost anything that you or I do!
-- Bill Reid
Neither I nor any of my ethical colleagues would knowingly do anything unethical in a case, or in writing about a case. I took pains to be sure everything was "kosher." Here's my somewhat long answer to your question (with the caveat that I'm not a lawyer!):
1. I neither have, nor ever had, any doctor-patient relationship with James Holmes, nor with anyone mentioned in the book. Thus there is no doctor-patient or therapist-client issue of confidentiality. (Clinical confidentiality requires such a relationship, which would only arise in situations such as treating the person, giving the person an opinion for clinical purposes, or doing something else related to clinical care.)
2. Forensic and administrative opinions such as those done for a court are not considered "clinical," and the person evaluated is not (or should not be) called a "patient" or "client." The purpose of such examinations or interviews is not clinical. I always notify the evaluee (which is what I call the person being interviewed or examined), orally and in writing, that I'm not his/her doctor and that no doctor-patient relationship is being created.
3. Regardless of the above, any information divulged in open court, unless specifically "sealed," immediately becomes public record (not confidential in any way), whether the information is medical or something else. (A great deal of the information, quotes, etc., in A Dark Night in Aurora was actually presented at the trial, including over 95% of my video-recorded interviews. The trial lasted for months, with continuous video and media coverage. Everything that happened in open court, literally, is on the YouTube and/or elsewhere on the Internet, including video and audio of scores of interviews, evaluations, interrogations, witness statements, etc..)
4. When a defendant enters a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity, his/her psychiatric/psychological/medical history and examinations are generally ruled public. That is, one can't plead insanity and then hide any clinical information from the court (which, in turn, makes it become public).
5. Law enforcement investigations, information, photos, recordings, etc., are public information unless sealed by a court. (In this case, that included many videos, thousands of photos, recordings and transcripts of scores of interviews of various people including Holmes, witness statements, etc.)
6. Some time after the trial, the trial judge (Samour) ruled, in a series of rulings related to what was public record, that even items that were suppressed during the trial (to protect Holmes's right to a fair trial) were now public record, since the case has been completely resolved.
7. During the writing process, I consulted, several times, an experienced attorney and expert in First Amendment legal issues, to be certain I was allowed to write what I did. That lawyer assured me, several times, that the book content is well within legal bounds. (I understand that "legal" isn't always the same thing as "ethical.")
Finally, as you've no doubt heard in your ethics course, "ethical" and "ethics" are somewhat fluid concepts; that's what makes them so interesting and such a good topic for lengthy discussions (which often have no satisfying resolution.) Seen narrowly, I was especially concerned with professional ethics: those specifically codified by the American Medical Association and the American Psychiatric Association. In that context, the organization code is well-published and the organizations are the only arbiters of what is ethical and what's not. It also means, in this narrow context, that the ethics codes are only enforced by those organizations against MEMBERS of those organizations. Broader concepts of ethics are important as well, and I adhered to those as I understand and interpret them. Nevertheless, I'm sure that a few people, using some interpretation (perhaps a personal one) of the many, many ways of viewing ethics, will find a way to criticise almost anything that you or I do!
-- Bill Reid
William H. Reid
From work and teaching experience, as usual for most of my writing. In the case of A Dark Night in Aurora, I spent over a year working on the tragic case of James Holmes and the Colorado cinema shootings, including evaluating him in great detail, working with the Colorado judicial and law enforcement systems, and testifying at length during the trial. The knowledge gained seemed important to share, not only with professionals (which I do in talks and lectures) but also with the public, and my agent and publisher agreed.
William H. Reid
As a nonfiction writer for the most part, who usually (except for some children's stories) writes about my work, "inspiration" isn't a big topic for me. I enjoy writing, and am narcissistic enough to want to publish. (The children's stories are inspired by our grandchildren; they come naturally.)
William H. Reid
Doing work that may or may not become a nidus for future writing.
William H. Reid
This may surprize you, but it's not some old bromide such as "Don't give up" or "Take rejection with a grain of salt" (though they are certainly good advice). My two cents: Realize that whatever you publish is permanent. Keep correcting, editing, proofreading until you have a product that will not embarass you in a couple of years! That doesn't mean procrastinate forever or be afraid to publish, and I love the adage "Perfect is the enemy of good" (probably Confucius), but don't let your work -- which represents YOU to anyone who reads it -- get out to the public (or agents or publishers) prematurely.
William H. Reid
Being your own boss. No question. Next best: Finishing a chapter or manuscript and watching it move through the publishing process. Seeing the book itself in print is a rush, but a temporary one; the process is more important to me.
William H. Reid
I'm afraid I've never had it! Just lucky, I guess.
About Goodreads Q&A
Ask and answer questions about books!
You can pose questions to the Goodreads community with Reader Q&A, or ask your favorite author a question with Ask the Author.
See Featured Authors Answering Questions
Learn more