There are several reasons to be careful with this book. Here I give only two, though more may follow, and they both seem foundational. a) Readers should be aware that the authors (pp. 25-6) dislike the possibility of "non-physical" threats to our safety, citing the history of 1/
changes in the DSM to reveal "content creep" that led to current concerns about student safety. The problem here is that non-physical causes of trauma are increasingly recognized by mental health professionals, e.g. Judith Lewis Herman (*Trauma* rev ed 2015) 57 reports on 2/
victims who were physically unharmed. Eliav Lieblich, expert on use of force in int'l law (based in Tel Aviv), reports on growing recognition of mental health problems caused inter alia by drones. A recent report from the Int'l Comm of the Red Cross insists on non-physical 3/
as one kind of trauma. *All these findings are contested,* including the definition of PTSD but they're all, importantly, examples of physicians and others working with real human subjects, not the claims of ideologues advocating a "subjective standard" (*Coddling* p 26). 4/
b) *Coddling* is closely associated with the work of Australian psychologist Nick Haslam, whose essay "Concept Creep" was the subject of an entire issue of the journal *Psychological Inquiry* 27:1, 1-17 (2016). Excellent issue, worthwhile study, and J. Haidt is a contributor. 5/
*Note* that Haidt is the only contributor who complains about "left leaning" mental health professionals, and that Haslam, without wholly disagreeing, expresses his reservations about "Haidt’s analysis of creep as an outcome of ideologically motivated intellectual practice." 6/
Def true, all this requires careful qualification, but readers should be aware (look at the deficient comments on Marcuse and Charles Murray, etc., and the carefully selected horror stories) that kicking the tires of this book is a prudent move. 7/
