It’s a question of where you think resource belong. In our old public school district ( very wealthy) there were very many mental health folks and counselors. In fact, if a kid was having an issue with learning another mental health person would often step in and suggest “helping” This happened several times to friends of mine, who had kids with issues other than mental health. It was hard to get rid of these folks and still retain the other services ( OT, PT and tutoring). I think this is unusual, however. Most schools have less funding than they need. The old school district didn’t have gifted/talented courses ( partly due to thinking and partly because the other groups who needed help were helped and there was no money left).
My belief is, mental health should be nominal in the public school but resources should be there to send kids out for help at the local hospital, or mental health services unit. When schools try to do the job of mental health professionals in a school setting, I don’t think anyone wins. The school mental health folks should be on the lookout for kids and should be a first line resource, not THE resource.
Also, groups need to be identified. For example, a child who is suicidal is definitely in a different category from one who is having a hard time socially.
Mental health resources seem to be available through health care. I am not sure why there is such a big need in the schools. But I honestly don’t know all of the issues. There must be a reason. The local high school has about 20% of kids in some special program or another. Why is this number so high?
Kids started talking to my kids about anxiety, suicidal thoughts and more in middle school. I don’t recall this being my experience as a child.
@Creekland is right. There isn’t enough help for kids with issues. Psychiatrists, psychologists and counselors who specialize in kids and teens are hard to find and even harder to get an appointment with. When I was looking for my son, at least 2/3rds had a “no new patients accepted” message on their voice mail recordings. It’s even harder if you can’t afford to pay and need insurance to cover the costs. Guess what?! A lot of psychiatrists don’t take insurance (for a variety of reasons.) I always tell med students: want to make a TON of money? Go into psychiatry and specialize in kids and teens.
I also agree that schools shouldn’t be put in the role of having to diagnose problems, much less having to deal with them. Teachers and administrators lack the proper education and background.
My own kid was failed by his schools - his issues were dismissed as laziness and lack of maturity. Which definitely played a role, don’t get me wrong. But his deeper issues - atypical ADHD, executive function disorder, depression and anxiety - needed a professional’s eye, not a principal’s or a teacher’s assessment.
My son wasn’t diagnosed until after his total nervous breakdown as a freshman in college. I don’t blame the schools, though - I blame myself. The onus was on ME to get him the help he clearly needed. Oh, and by the way, it took me ABOUT A YEAR to finally find the people and the medication that did help him.
These aren’t easy issues. Pretending they are only compounds the problem.
I agree it can be very challenging to find good help.
We had a very hard time finding a good therapist and good psychiatrist for our teen within our health insurance plan network. We had some incredibly disappointing appointments.
Frustration boiling up, I looked outside our health plan network. The therapist and psychiatrist we eventually settled on were both out of network and did not accept insurance. I cannot believe how much we spent that year and a half – but I was feeling desperate for competent help and time was running out (leaving for college).
I do wish we could take better care of all of our citizens.
One of the things that you must realize is that most counseling that occurs in the school setting relates to how the social emotional is affecting the student academic performance. For a student who has counseling as part of their IEP goals, the counseling is geared toward identifying triggers that may get in the way of the student being successful in the classroom and coming up with coping mechanisms /behavior strategies that will help the student be successful in class.
High school counselors are not responsible for therapy in the counseling sessions because there are simply not enough resources in the school to do this. many high school counselors have easily 300 students on their caseloads. In this case, students who have mandated counseling as part of their IEP are the priority. Of course counselors step in when a child is in crisis, but they can not provide on going therapy sessions for students in the school setting.
This is usually referred to outside counselors or if there is a school based clinic, students are referred to the psychologist at the school clinic.
A student with an ED diagnosis on his IEP will always have counseling as part of his IEP.
There is an expectation that students who have IEPs for LD, Speech, other health impairments who be scaffolding to having less supports as they get older and are hopefully meeting IEP goals. So a student who starts out with individual and group counseling in elementary school should hopefully not have counseling by the time s/he is a senior or having counseling once a month for check ins.
Maybe I am being a bit naive, but I think our school does a pretty good job striking a balance. No, it isn’t all things to all people, but there is a compromise of sorts going on that seems… well… fair.
For one thing they started a whole wellness curriculum two years ago. Gym and health are an integrated class and is required all four years. DD does not love it (but doesn’t hate it either), but there is no doubt exercize is good for everyone, reduces stress, and can even help combat low levels of depression. Since DD doesn’t participate in EC sports, I think this is a healthy part of her day, even if the kids don’t all appreciate the benefits a short workout can provide. Junior and senior year they can actually pick their activity, which makes it less miserable. It’s not the gym class I had growing up, that’s for sure!
The high school is very big on partipation in ECs… sports or clubs, it doesn’t matter. They are always reporting to parents studies about the relationship between school involvement and participation with better academic performance and improved mental health, higher graduation rates, etc. Still, despite very small or no fees (or waivers), two different “late bus” times, and guidance, homeroom teachers and administration tracking, supporting, and encouraging students in this, a lot of kids choose not to participate. And that’s fine - I am sure some of them are working or otherwise helping to support their families. However, if there is a positive correlation here, why defund such activities if your school district doesn’t absolutely have to? Who knows how many problems this “whole wellness” might be preventing before they start?
Our HS is very large, and we actually do have multiple psychologists and psychiatrists on staff. As I understand it, their primary ongoing focus is IEPs and learning-related issues. They will see students for other mental health needs, but they will refer students out to private practices after as few as three visits (learned that tidbit after bad depression hit a friend of DD’s). Three is not many, but if the problem is, say, an eating disorder or suicide ideation, it doesn’t make sense to repeatedly see a psychologist trained to specialize primarily in learning differences.
We’re not a particularly wealthy school district, but we are big. That’s why we have some of the resources that we do. While not everything can be scaled, in my opinion cutting sports or gym is equivilant to cutting out a “whole wellness” program.
I think everyone wants the programs funded that will help their kids. I have two very average kids. Adding more AP classes in German and Physics wasn’t going to help them. Adding more counselors or mental health counselors wasn’t going to help either. I don’t begrudge other students getting what they need, but why should my kids also not get what they need? Someone has to set the budget.
Mine started at a new school in second grade, in a very wealthy district. There were 22 kids in their class and 5 would go to special reading classes, another 4 were off to G&T time in the lab, a few would go to work with the 3rd grade math teacher, several went to ESL (26 languages in the school). My kids sat in the classroom all day long (and one had an IEP). All the comings and goings were very disruptive but no one cared about the average kids. We left the school after about 5 weeks.
So do I think it is a good use of public funds to have a sports team that benefits 50 kids instead of funding a program that may only help 5? Yes. I’m glad that there was a theater program that was enjoyed by 100 students. Sometimes we, as society, have to spend the money where it will benefit the most students.
When my daughter played a sport at a California public school, it cost me almost $900. No late buses (in fact no buses at all at that school), most equipment provided by the players, volunteer coaches. If the school had cancelled her sport, there would have been exactly $0 left to direct to another program or pay the salary for a mental health provider.
I often wonder where parents with kids with very different needs want the funds directed. Does the quarterback’s parent want the football team cancelled to direct the money to mental health because they also have a son who needs those services? Do they want the the school play cancelled even though their daughter really benefits from it and is very talented?
I’d be happy if the schools did what most colleges do, that is, have a list of approved psychologists and psychiatrists and NPs.
The issue lies with the reimbursement by commercial insurance to these professionals. To spend 8 years in graduate school, to receive between $50-70 per hour, barely covers expenses. Some insurances reduced their payments by 1/3 in past few years. Attending school conference meetings can take 2-3 hours, but are not reimbursable.
My colleague, fluent in 3 languages, was offered a school position. She was suppose to cover 3 schools, do testing, and evaluations, and attend meetings. (As a side note, she received her PhD from a HYP grad school). There was no,way she could do this amount of work within 60 hours, and no way could she fulfill the expectations.
Sure, but one big difference is that the kids have to take a class anyway; xx classes are mandated for graduation. Whether it is AP Lang or Math or History or other Elective, it really doesn’t matter to the budget which classroom seat the kid sits in. (as long as the classes are reasonably full.)