There is a debate brewing in beanhouse and I’m wondering if any districts have found a good equilibrium. My kids had conventional success in HS (grades, sports, clubs. etc) and were able to take advantage of AP and dual enrollment. My kids cousins are OK students but don’t participate in sports or clubs. One had a mental health issue that became dangerous and were not helped by divorce and a bad romantic relationship. My sibling feels there should be less resources for kids like mine so there can be more mental health care in schools. I presume that the mandate isn’t there so the funding isn’t there (yet but hopefully one day) and said as much. I wish there were money for it all but there is not and our schools have been put in the position of being everything to some students with out the means or resources to do it. Has any district solved this?
This question could really encompass more than just school district priorities and funding. Many health care plans don’t pay for mental health services, for example, so is it best to provide more access in the academic setting?
I was involved in sports and am somewhat cynical in hindsight about a lot of what went on back then. I’m not familiar with school district finances, but the optics suggest too much emphasis on sports, so I may lean toward your brother’s side.
This link talks about 1 in 5 youths experiencing mental health issues, but 60% don’t receive services.
I remember like yesterday the looks on some kids faces who were clearly struggling to deal with something, but I was too young and dumb to help. No doubt, many continued to have difficulties beyond school, and I wonder if some sort of intervention in the academic setting could have helped.
Other than LDs, I don’t view it as the job of schools to diagnose or treat mental health problems. Serious mental health problems require the care of a psychologist or psychiatrist. Letting low level providers play doctor for serious problems can do more harm than good. Alternatively, if schools want to be in the business of providing free medical care to all their students complete with on site pediatricians, psychiatrists, ophthalmologists, and dentists, the cost would be infeasible within existing school budgets.
Oh please. It isn’t a one or the other. Schools do the best they can to provide a safe and stimulating environment to their students. However they are not medical facilities. If a student has more serious needs beyond what the school social worker/counselor can provide they need to seek the help of their medical doctor.
The way you present this question is interesting: preserving resources for “kids like mine” versus mental health funding. To take it out of the personal, our small school system has often, over the years, debated keeping the school psychologist in or out of the budget, and I have seen both happen. It really does come down, sometimes, to music and art versus the psychologist.
If a family does not have the means to fund mental health counseling outside of school, they might want to visit their local hospital financial counseling office or wherever health insurance counseling is done in their community. If income is low enough, there may be help, supplemental public insurance, or information on a lower-cost clinic.
In our town, PTO and an education foundation also fund some extracurriculars, funding which should not take the place of public funding but which can at least initiate opportunities without impacting the overall budget.
Many schools, even small ones, are very aware of mental health needs- and debates happen everywhere on the priorities in budgets, the role of public schools in mental health and social services and preserving extracurricular activities.
The only other thing is that many parents choose to get private counseling anyway, even when offered by the school. For privacy mainly. And schools are notorious for calling in child protective services for little reason, to pass the liability on, particularly for kids who are a danger to self or others.
Just had a conversation with my co-worker. Her 11 years old niece tried to commit suicide. Parents blamed the school for not recognizing the problems and tested her before it gets this bad. I just shook my head with the parents completely not taking the responsibility. The kid is already at the special ed class, there is no “lower level” or “more specialized class” at this school, no reason for the school to just randomly “test” the kid, and test for what? They already knew she has issues therefore she is in the special class. She had some incidents and the parents were notified and discussions happened, the parents didn’t take the next steps but yet they expected the school to. Sure everyone missed the sign, but the sign were there. There is only so much a school can do. People need to take responsibility for their own kids.
But what about the cases that fall short of being “serious”?
My kids go to school in the ghetto, with fights every day. A school-based counselor can recognize situations, and fully understand the environment that may be causing issues with a child. Maybe just a first line of defense.
^^ Not sure if it was a response to mine - but i agreed that when the school sees something they take action, and in that particular case I share, they did. That was why she was in special ed class, that was why they contacted the parents, that was why they had discussions. School suggested therapy and the girl is already in therapy. The parents kept saying the school failed to test their kid. They take no responsibility whatsoever. Ugh.
“The way you present this question is interesting: preserving resources for “kids like mine” versus mental health funding.”
I think my sibling feels that way because my kids’ needs were met via AP classes and extra curricular activities while my nieces mental health needs were not met at school. In my siblings mind my kids took funding from hers. I love the idea of schools being a first line of defence because they truly are the only interaction or opportunity social services might be involved for some families. But so far the boundaries and funding aren’t clearly defined here. It’s maybe wearing on me as we are seeing each other more often during the Thanksgiving - Christmas holidays and things are implied and I don’t want to raise the tension. However I am sort of tired of being made to feel bad.
Sorry, @Nhatrang . Yes, it was in response to your situation. And I do agree with your assessment there.
I was mentioning less serious cases where it is a simple personality conflict that outside counselors, and even parents, have difficulty addressing. My guess is that most cases could be resolved at the school, but in more serious cases, get parents and outside counseling involved. And if the parents act like those in your situation? ??♂️
I don’t see how putting a child in special ed classes helps with a mental health issue. Learning disabilities and mental health aren’t the same thing.
We had a local girl hang herself in the school bathroom. Honors student, AP classes, active in clubs and theater, a boyfriend. Kissed him good bye at lunch, went to the girls room and hung herself. She didn’t need special ed classes. Her parents had had her in a hospital getting treatment not long before this. Unfortunately this isn’t an easy fix. Just like throwing money at poor schools doesn’t improve performance.
She has all sort of problems, severe ADHD is a start. Special ed gives her the extra support she needed that she wouldn’t normally get from a regular class.
I think schools have to get involved. Yes, parents SHOULD take care of their kids’ mental health issues but in most cases they don’t. We can’t let these kids fall between the cracks. There is a huge crisis in this country. Groups like NAMI are doing their best to help. Google “Sources of Strength” to get an idea. I’m glad we live in the 21st century and are realizing we need to help young people achieve their potential.
The philosophical part of me says you ask yourself what is the function of the public school. If it is to educate/prepare for workforce or for more education, then it makes sense that schools offer a range of academic options, including special ed, vo tech, and advanced academic options like AP. It meets this mission first. The problem, I think, is that we’ve lost sight of the primary function of a school and figure, hey, it’s got the kids 7 hrs every day, it should also… fill in the blank. Personally, I don’t think you ought to add mental health screening and treatment to the list of responsibilities. The cynical part of me thinks the public school wouldn’t do a great job of this. The practical part of me does think about the budget, and no I don’t think merely doing away with sports would free up enough taxpayer dollars to come close to covering the cost of comprehensive mental health treatment. Is there something more mission related we could do with the budget rather than cover sports and other ECs? Probably, but that’s a different debate. For the sake of the safety of all students, should we have someone on campus, like a school counselor, who can refer students to proper care or alert the admin to potential issues? Yeah. But as far as providing treatment? No.
Suicide is the second leading cause of death for kids aged 10-14.
^^ In one of our internal studies for our company for a depression drug, it was the leading cause of death for kids from 10-18.
Curious what is the first leading cause of death in your data, @MaineLonghorn ?
I’m.not sure. I’ll see if I can find the link. I would guess auto accidents.
I think @ordinarylives said exactly how I feel. It’s a terrible quandry - yes parents should be the primary source for kid to get mental health care from. If they are unwilling or unable schools become the default. Not ideal especially if they can’t get parent support for the child either. Then whose responsibility does it become? That’s the gap - schools can possibly identify the need but can’t really follow through the process. I have seen that there are more resources in a university setting where they can charge everyone a fee for having the services available but public schools can’t do that. And not everyone goes to college either.
If what I’m hearing is correct for more than just my area of the US, the problem is lack of providers. I can suggest guidance take a look at Student A because I see something off, they can agree, but then they hit the wall and have to wait to see someone.
Even if every school were mandated to have a licensed Psychiatrist, where would they come from? A Psychologist can only do so much.
Coaches are everywhere and most don’t make a lot at my school.
AP, Special Ed, etc, is a school doing what they are supposed to do - educate the next generation to their ability.
I would cut sports before education. Not gym class or art/music, but extra curricular sports.
Probably not, but it would pay for some fairly hefty mental health services. Thinking of the local high school closest to us, the football team alone has one full time and three part time coaches, uniforms, equipment, travel and let’s not forget - a stadium. Not having those expenses would easily cover 1 full time psychiatrist and 2-3 supporting psychologists.
So I can see the OP’s sister’s position that instead of having a small staff of mental health providers, a school has a sport that only boys can play, that is known to cause long term brain damage, that is not a “lifetime” sport that people will play for years after participating but gee is it fun to watch… Maybe not the best choice for taxpayer $$$.
On the other hand, even though this one facet of the discussion (does it make more sense to spent school $ on football or mental health) makes sense, I’m not convinced I want the put mental health services in the hands of government or schools for a variety of reasons.