Skip to main content

Why Are We Afraid of Mental Health Screening?


Should all school children be screened for mental health?

The evidence suggests that if we do not screen them, then we will be continuing a persistent and historical pattern of neglecting the mental health needs of our children.  But why let evidence get in the way of fear?

Over the past several months, legislators in a number of states have considering mandating ā€“ or at least offering ā€“ mental health screening for all children, either in the schools or in pediatriciansā€™ offices. 


But when the Connecticut Legislature had a public hearing on a mental health screening bill recently, opponents came out in force

One parent called mandatory screening an ā€œunnecessary invasion.ā€  The Connecticut Civil Liberties Union argued that mental health screenings should be optional.  A treatment provider asserted that the problem wasnā€™t with a lack of assessment, but the lack of treatment options.

And in recent days, a Palm Beach Post writer in Florida joined the chorus when he claimed that mental health screening is less ā€œstraightforwardā€ than vision and hearing screening in an editorial entitled ā€œFlorida Should Not Require Mental Health Screenings in Schools.ā€

The truth is that if we donā€™t at least screen, then we donā€™t know what it is weā€™re supposed to treat.  And this ā€œhead in the sandā€ approach is what has gotten us into trouble in the first place.

The extent of our neglect of our childrenā€™s mental health needs is staggering.  

In 1999, the U.S. Surgeon General estimated that 10 percent of children had mental illnesses serious enough to disrupt their home life or schooling.  That percentage is still cited today, but we have more recent data, too.

For example, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration noted that in 2009 two million children between the ages of 12 and 17, or 8.1 percent of the population, had a major depressive episode.

In the same report, SAMHSA also disclosed that 2.9 million children that year, or 12.1 percent of the population, received at least some mental health services in a school setting.

But hereā€™s where the neglect comes in.  Only 407,000 children in 2009 received special education services because of their mental illness ā€“ just a fraction of those who needed them.

And this neglect is getting worse.  According to the most recent data from the U.S. Department of Education, only 389,000 children were offered special education services in 2011 as a result of their mental illness.  To put this number in context, this was:
  • The smallest number in 20 years;
  • A drop of over 20 percent in just six years; and
  • Only 8 tenths of one percent of the entire school-age population.

In other words, less than one in every ten children with a serious mental illness is even identified as emotionally disturbed by our special education system.

As for the other nine in ten, their time bombs just tick silently.

Perhaps this could be justified if the stakes were low.  But they are not.  We all know the results of neglect.  We see them every day in our homes and neighborhoods, and, most tragically, on the news.

And what is most frustrating is that the ā€œcontroversialā€ screening that could save lives is both simple and non-invasive ā€“ and straightforward. 

More often than not, mental health screening consists of a few questions that can be answered and scored in minutes. 

Here is a link to a commonly-used tool, called the PHQ-9.

It asks nine questions about how a person has felt in the last two weeks, with one follow-up question at the end.  Has the person been having trouble falling asleep or staying asleep, or sleeping too much? Been feeling tired? Experienced a poor appetite or overeating? Had trouble concentrating?

These are hardly the kinds of questions that probe so deeply into the psyche of the individual as to scar or stigmatize them for life. 

But, ironically, when we refuse to ask these questions we do end up stigmatizing people for life ā€“ if not costing them their lives.

It may seem hard to believe that there could be any fuss about using such screening tools universally when you consider the alternative.  Or that the tools can reasonably accurately identify an emerging mental illness.  But they can, and do.  And the more we use them, the better off we will be.

So what are our schools afraid of?  And, more importantly, what are we all afraid of? 

To reach Paul Gionfriddo via email: gionfriddopaul@gmail.com.  Twitter: @pgionfriddo.  Facebook: www.facebook.com/paul.gionfriddo.  LinkedIn:  www.linkedin.com/in/paulgionfriddo/ 

Comments

  1. Well the main reason I don't support this is because this is a SCAM put on by the big pharmaceutical companies, to get your child on prescription drugs. In Connecticut, forced mental health assessments on all children are being supported by a lobby group of Johnson & Johnson, the biggest pharmaceutical company in the world. The interesting thing is, all of these mass shooters were either ON, or COMING OFF OF, prescription drugs, however no politician seems to want to address that fact, instead, they are trying to push MORE drugs on children. Maybe it is because of the heavy influence ($$$) that BIG PHARMA companies have in politics.

    But most importantly, don't I have the right to decide whether my child sees a 'mental health' doctor? The state seems to think they own your children, indoctrinating them with propaganda and lies through the public school system, and now wanting to force mental health doctors on them, to push drugs for big pharma. Disgusting.
    http://www.thegoodmanchronicle.com/2013/03/forced-mental-health-assessments-being.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you have it backwards. While it is possible that screening would lead to more use of medications, it is more likely that it would lead to less use of the wrong medication, and almost certain that it would lead to earlier use of the right one for the child (or adult). And wouldn't you rather be in a position to make an informed decision about about whether or not to bring your child to a mental health professional, should that need ever arise?

      Delete
  2. This post is surprising to me.Your writing is good and fast.I glad to read to it and thanks for sharing it.

    muscle pain relief in Taiwan

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mental screening for children should be implemented and parents should support this kind of screening because this is really good for our children's life. If children undergo mental screening,it doesn't mean that they are mentally disorder, we just want to prove that there's nothing wrong with them and for us to be aware whatever the result is.


    eye exam irmo sc

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

For the Health of Our Community, Can We Plan More in Advance?

Mayor Florsheim has proposed a budget with a 2.7 mill increase for the coming fiscal year. This will mean an increase in taxes of approximately $500 per year for a home with a market value (not an assessed value) of $250,000, with larger increases for many homes in our city. While I appreciate the time and effort that went into his budget calculation, like many people I donā€™t believe that this is a sustainable increase on top of the increases of the past few years. What I appreciate even more is that the Mayor has invited members of the public to work together to offer their own perspective and suggestions to the City Council. In the past few weeks, I have offered several short-term suggestions, including a job freeze, a search for an alternative health insurance provider, and greater advocacy at the state level for fairer PILOT funding for Middletown. As an example, the Mayorā€™s budget proposes $77,800 for a Grantwriter versus zero from the Finance Department. Maybe we wait on that? ...

Veterans and Mental Illness

On a sultry June morning in our nationalā€™s capital last Friday, I visited the Vietnam Veterans Memorial .   Scores of people moved silently along the Wall, viewing the names of the men and women who died in that war.   Some stopped and took pictures.   One group of men about my age surrounded one name for a photo.   Two young women posed in front of another, perhaps a grandfather or great uncle they never got to meet. It is always an incredibly moving experience to visit the Wall.   It treats each of the people it memorializes with respect. There is no rank among those honored.   Officer or enlisted, rich or poor, each is given equal space and weight. It is a form of acknowledgement and respect for which many veterans still fight. Brave Vietnam veterans returned from Southeast Asia to educate our nation about the effects of war and violence. I didnā€™t know anything about Post Traumatic Stress Disorder when I entered the Connecticut Legislature in the...

Scapegoats and Concepts of a Plan: How Trump Fails Us

When a politician says he has ā€œconcepts of a planā€ instead of a plan, there is no plan. And yet, thatā€™s where we are with Donald Trump, nine years after he first launched a political campaign promising to replace Obamacare with something cheaper and better, nearly four years after he had four years to try to do just that. And fail. Doubling down during Tuesdayā€™s debate, he claimed he had ā€œconcepts of a planā€ to replace Obamacare. Really? Heā€™s got nothing. In fact, he sounds just like Nixon sounded in 1968, when he claimed he had a ā€œsecretā€ plan to get us out of Vietnam. That turned out to be no plan at all (remember ā€œVietnamization?ā€) and cost us seven more years there and tens of thousands of lives. The Affordable Care Act, about which I wrote plenty in this blog a decade or more ago, wasnā€™t perfect. But it was a whole lot better than what we had before it ā€“ and anything (save a public option) that has been proposed since. Back then, insurers could deny coverage because of pre-exi...