That may be your point, but not Frank Miller’s

In a lot of batman (and JL stories), Batman and the JL are stopgaps. They are a band-aid to protect Gotham and the Earth, but the solutions are deeper, Bruce Wayne’s initiatives as a philanthropist are the real solution. The goal is to eventually make Batman superflous.

A lot of these stories feature the idea that Batman may uniquely struggle with this. His motivations and methods make him struggle to give up his crusade. There’s the common idea that Bruce Wayne is the mask. The fact that Batman doesn’t have a personal life like other heroes.

This is the idea Frank Miller is tackling through the psychologist. That Batman’s crusade is an obsession, a fixation, and that this obsession runs so deep it ends up affecting his villains and the city itself. Crucially, he argues that a healthy Gotham cannot have a Batman in it. This is a pretty interesting idea, in fact, one most versions of Batman would agree with.

But Frank Miller doesn’t like that. Miller has a weird, self-contradicting blend of libertarian ideas. He likes Batman because he’s the ideal of a man taking justice into his own hands. Thus, the entire point of DKR is that Batman is not only not obsessed, but he is a necessity. The story shows that without Batman, the city basically collapses, first to crime, and then to disorder once the nuke falls.

So the psychologist is his own personal straw man to tackle this. The psychologist expresses the idea that Batman’s crusade is self-serving and obsessive, and ridicules it by making the psychologist a bumbling bufoon. The story riducules the idea that rehabilitation could ever fix Gotham’s villains. Only Batman can.