Following the deadly mass shooting at a Minneapolis church last week, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said at a press conference that he sees mass shootings as “a health crisis.” That much is true and supported by research. But then Kennedy shared that “we’re looking for the first time at psychiatric drugs” as a culprit.
Kennedy also said during a Fox News appearance that he is interested in “the potential contribution of some of the SSRI drugs and some of the other psychiatric drugs that might be contributing to violence.”
Kennedy’s comments connecting mass shootings with psychiatric medications like SSRIs (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) are not only baseless, but they also dangerously contort the conversation surrounding mental health, violence and care in America.
Decades of research have examined whether antidepressants provoke violent behavior; the findings remain consistent: No direct causal association has been found, especially in adults.
There’s also a fundamental contradiction at play in the conservative theory that mass shootings are the result of mental health and not guns — yet according to Kennedy, a loud and leading voice in President Donald Trump’s administration, also the result of the medication commonly prescribed to treat mental health. Not only do Kennedy’s ill-informed and reckless comments spread dangerous misinformation, but they also fracture a party line that the Trump administration in particular has long clung to: that America’s disproportionate rate of gun violence and mass shootings is a result of poor mental health, not the proliferation of guns, inadequate gun control and glorification of gun culture.
What unfolds when leaders peddle misinformation is not just academic — it reverberates in daily life, and it can discourage people from seeking help and deepen the stigma that already prevents so many from accessing care.
Let’s start with the facts: The scientific evidence does not support a link between SSRIs and acts of violence, or mass shootings. Decades of research have examined whether antidepressants provoke violent behavior; the findings remain consistent: No direct causal association has been found, especially in adults.
To the contrary, the evidence supporting the clinical effectiveness of SSRIs in depression and anxiety in adults is overwhelming. Kennedy’s remarks depart from these facts. By “looking into SSRIs” in the wake of tragedy, he invokes unsubstantiated fears rather than scientific consensus. Even though he is one of the most prominent health officials in the United States, his comments reflect a lack of education at best and hypocrisy at worst.
Kennedy’s statements align dangerously with long-held beliefs associating mental health treatments or mental illness itself with crime and violence. For years, researchers have led anti-stigma campaigns and worked to educate the public about the finding that there is no mental illness for which violence is a symptom.
The belief that mental illness breeds violence is both pervasive and harmful, driving stigma and discrimination in all directions. Research consistently shows that these perceptions lower help-seeking rates. Remarks like Kennedy’s further feed these fears, suggesting not only that those struggling with depression could be dangerous, but also that the medicines proven to separate despair from hope might make things worse. In an atmosphere of such suspicion, families hesitate to reach out, patients question their prescriptions, and doctors face backlash for offering standard care.
Kennedy’s comments heralding old, disproven tropes over evidence and compassion reflect a crisis in leadership, and in common sense. RFK Jr.’s proposal to launch new investigations into SSRIs post-shootings is evocative of the worst moments in media: scapegoating treatments rather than addressing systemic gaps in support, prevention and gun policy. And this error is magnified by his role; when the secretary of health and human services abandons science, it is not only the marginalized who bear the cost — it is every American who might someday need care. In the absence of leadership from the highest levels of government, we must fill the void with clarity and empathy. The data paint a clear picture: SSRIs are lifesaving for millions. When scientists and public health officials use their platforms for truth-telling and vulnerability, they promote healing and encourage people to seek help when they need it. But reckless claims do the opposite. They foster shame, perpetuate myths and keep suffering in the shadows. Kennedy’s remarks should impel us not to retreat but to drive forward, to champion robust mental health care, nuanced public discourse and relentless advocacy against stigma. RFK Jr. must be held accountable — not only for misinforming, but also for ignoring the weight his words carry for families, clinicians and those on the margins of hope. The future of mental health hinges on science and compassion, not on the old ghosts of fear.
Dr. Kavita Patel
Dr. Kavita Patel is a teaching professor of medicine, Division of Hospital Medicine, at Stanford University and a board-certified internal medicine physician. She served in the Obama administration as director of policy for the Office of Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement in the White House. Her area of expertise is around the intersection of health policy, clinical medicine and innovation. She also spends time advising venture capital and is a medical contributor for NBC News.
Benjamin F. Miller
Benjamin F. Miller is a nationally recognized clinical psychologist and health policy expert with decades of experience advancing mental health integration and system reform. He maintains an adjunct faculty appointment at Stanford School of Medicine and was the founding director of the Eugene S. Farley Jr. Health Policy Center at the University of Colorado School of Medicine. 
