A prominent psychiatric organization is allowing its members to comment on President Trump’s mental state — defying the decades-old “Goldwater rule” that dissuades such experts from remarking on a public figure’s mental health.

On July 6, the American Psychoanalytic Association sent an email to its 3,500 members stating that they no longer need to subscribe to the ethical standard, according to Stat News.

The statement is a stark break from the American Psychiatric Association, which first implemented the standard more than 50 years ago and reaffirmed its support for the rule in March.

“It was unethical and irresponsible back in 1964 to offer professional opinions on people who were not properly evaluated and it is unethical and irresponsible today,” Maria A. Oquendo, president of the American Psychiatric Association, said in a March 16 statement.

During the 1964 election, the now-defunct Fact magazine surveyed 12,356 psychiatrists on whether the Republican presidential nominee, Sen. Barry Goldwater, was mentally capable of being president. Totted up, 2,417 psychiatrists responded and 1,189 said he wasn’t psychologically fit to hold office. Goldwater successfully sued the magazine for libel.

Thus the Goldwater rule was established by the American Psychiatric Association in 1973. It states that psychiatrists and psychologists shouldn’t offer a psychological assessment of someone they haven’t met or personally evaluated.

“We don’t want to prohibit our members from using their knowledge responsibly,” Dr. Prudence Gourguechon, a past president of the American Psychoanalytic Association, told Stat News. “Since Trump’s behavior is so different from anything we’ve seen before.”

The statement from the American Psychoanalytic Association is the first definitive crack in a field that’s been at odds with itself over the relevancy of the Goldwater rule since Trump’s candidacy. The arguments for and against the ethical code have only intensified in the last few months.

A growing number of psychologists and psychiatrists have called the standard a “gag rule,” arguing that they have a responsibility to warn the public about what they perceive as Trump’s unstable mental state. Many have pointed to narcissism, paranoia, poor attention and impulsivity as mental health afflictions that are impairing his ability to be president.

Thirty-three psychiatrists wrote a letter to the New York Times on Feb. 13 stating that Trump’s “grave emotional instability” showed he couldn’t safely govern the country.

The following day, Dr. Allen Frances, who billed himself as writing the “criteria that defines” narcissistic personality disorder, wrote a letter stating that “psychiatric name-calling” wasn’t the way to denounce the president. He added that “bad behavior is rarely a sign of mental illness.”

Most recently, Psychiatric Times published dueling opinion columns on the topic, and the psychiatrist who argued against the Goldwater rule announced he’d be resigning from the American Psychiatric Association after 41 years.

As it stands, violating the Goldwater rule technically has no solid penalties. An association could file a complaint with the member’s state medical board, but that has never happened.

The American Psychological Association told Stat News that they “prefer” their members don’t comment on the psychology of public figures, but that they don’t have a Goldwater rule.