El Paso, Dayton, and Mental Illness

Is mental illness behind the mass shootings that occur in America—251 in the past 216 days? President Trump and leading Republicans are blaming mental illness in the aftermath of the latest killings, in El Paso and Dayton. Professional psychologists say mental illness is not the problem, guns, racism, intolerance, and bigotry are. Blaming mental illness for violence dangerously reinforces the stigma around mental illness, making it less likely that those who need treatment will receive treatment.

protest

March for Our Lives protest, Los Angeles, March 24, 2016

“These are people that are very, very seriously mentally ill,” Trump said of the mass shootings. Texas Governor Greg Abbott, also a Republican, said in El Paso after the Walmart massacre there: “Mental health is a large contributor to any type of violence or shooting violence.”

Rosie Phillips Davis, president of the American Psychological Association, immediately pushed back against the blame in a statement on Sunday.

“Routinely blaming mass shootings on mental illness is unfounded and stigmatizing,” she said. “Research has shown that only a very small percentage of violent acts are committed by people who are diagnosed with, or in treatment for, mental illness. The rates of mental illness are roughly the same around the world, yet other countries are not experiencing these traumatic events as often as we face them. One critical factor is access to, and the lethality of, the weapons that are being used in these crimes. Adding racism, intolerance and bigotry to the mix is a recipe for disaster.”

More from the APA president’s statement:

“Our condolences are with the families and friends of those killed or injured in these horrific shootings and with all Americans affected every day by the twin horrors of hate and gun violence.

“As our nation tries to process the unthinkable yet again, it is clearer than ever that we are facing a public health crisis of gun violence fueled by racism, bigotry and hatred. The combination of easy access to assault weapons and hateful rhetoric is toxic. Psychological science has demonstrated that social contagion — the spread of thoughts, emotions and behaviors from person to person and among larger groups — is real, and may well be a factor, at least in the El Paso shooting.

“That shooting is being investigated as a hate crime, as it should be. Psychological science has demonstrated the damage that racism can inflict on its targets. Racism has been shown to have negative cognitive and behavioral effects on both children and adults and to increase anxiety, depression, self-defeating thoughts and avoidance behaviors.

“If we want to address the gun violence that is tearing our country apart, we must keep our focus on finding evidence-based solutions. This includes restricting access to guns for people who are at risk for violence and working with psychologists and other experts to find solutions to the intolerance that is infecting our nation and the public dialogue.”

Here are perspectives from a 2016 interview with Liza Gold, clinical professor of psychiatry at Georgetown University and editor of Gun Violence and Mental Illness:

“Most serious mental illness is only weakly associated with violence of any kind—and with gun violence in particular. Most people with serious mental illness are not violent; most people who are violent do not have serious mental illness. Individuals with mental illness are responsible for about 3 percent to 5 percent of all types of violence in the U.S.—when they do become violent, they are most likely to assault family members or commit suicide.

“Firearm violence committed by individuals with serious mental illness against strangers is one of the rarest forms of gun violence in the US. Of the approximately 33,000 firearm deaths each year, two-thirds are suicides. Less than 1 percent of all firearm deaths in the US occur in the context of mass shootings by individuals, with or without mental illness. So unless the media and politicians are talking about suicide deaths by firearms—which they never are—they are simply perpetuating negative stereotypes and stigma associated with mental illness.

“The thinking goes like this: only someone who is crazy would commit such a horrible act and kill innocent people. We all know that crazy people are dangerous and violent; therefore, it must be people with mental illness who are behind these horrible acts. However, mass shootings are not invariably associated with people who have acute mental illness or a history of mental illness. Some do, but some don’t.

“Improved funding and resources for mental health systems and treatment would of course be welcomed. However, the repeated calls to “improve the mental health system” heard after mass shootings do not result in increased spending or funding. They merely serve as a politically expedient method to avoid talking about instituting sensible firearm regulation.”

Gold says the refrain to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill does a disservice to American society:

It reinforces the stigma and negative stereotypes associated with mental illness, making it less likely that those who need treatment will receive treatment.

It does not result in improved funding of or access to mental health treatment.

It allows politicians and media to avoid discussing sensible gun regulations.

Because no effective change results, the American people have come to believe that “nothing can be done” to stop the high toll of gun violence, despite the fact that we are the only country in the world with this kind of civilian gun violence problem.

The APA points to a variety of resources for people who are suffering distress in the aftermath of the shootings in El Paso and Dayton:

Exploring Strategies to Stop Bullying

Surveying students about the prevalence of bullying. Training teachers, coaches, parents, and young people on how to respond. Encouraging youth to be upstanders. Holding annual Bullying Prevention Day activities to spread awareness. These were a few of the ideas discussed Saturday at a two-hour Community Forum sponsored by the Tompkins County Bullying Prevention Task Force.

IMG_8570

Celia Clement reviewing feedback on school bullying

The Task Force held the forum to introduce its work to the public and to solicit ideas from the community on strategies to address bullying. More than two dozen government agencies, community organizations, and representatives from the county’s six school districts formed the Task Force in March.

“A lot of these conversations and diving deep into these topics can become very personal and very painful, which we want to honor,” said Nigel Gannon, a Healthy Living Program Specialist for New York State 4-H Youth Development, who moderated the forum.

“We have to develop spaces where we can have those emotions in a positive way. Remember that we are all feeling the same [about bullying], in some way, as individuals, as loved ones, as community members. We are not happy to be here, I think we are hopeful to be here. We’re going to help the Task Force get the information they need to try to move this forward.”

Scott MacLeod of The Sophie Fund kicked off presentations by Task Force working groups by reviewing basic information about bullying in national, regional, and local contexts.

He noted the federal government’s definition of bullying, and how it should be distinguished from other behaviors such as conflict, rudeness, and meanness:

“Bullying is any unwanted aggressive behavior(s) by another youth or group of youths who are not siblings or current dating partners that involves an observed or perceived power imbalance and is repeated multiple times or is highly likely to be repeated.”

MacLeod explained how bullying has psychological, physical, and academic effects, and adversely affects youth who are bullied as well as those who engage in bullying. He said that youth who are perceived as different, especially LGBTQ children, are at greater risk. Persistent bullying, he added, can lead to or worsen feelings of isolation, rejection, exclusion, and despair, as well as depression and anxiety, which can contribute to suicidal behavior. MacLeod said that while there is no federal stature that expressly outlaws bullying, New York State’s Dignity for All Students Act (DASA) came into force in 2012 to protect students from bullying, harassment, and discrimination.

Citing statistics, MacLeod’s report said 19 percent of American high school students are bullied, and 14.9 percent experience cyberbullying. He said that data for the 2017-2018 school year, most likely reflecting underreporting, showed that Tompkins County school districts had 109 incidents of discrimination, harassment, and bullying , and 20 incidents of cyberbullying.

Celia Clement, a retired school social worker and now an independent consultant, delivered a report on potential approaches for addressing bullying in schools. She identified five areas for attention:

  • Communication: Families are not always getting the information they need about bullying definition, prevention, intervention, education, district policies and the laws involved such as the Dignity for All Students Act.
  • Education: Families and school staff want help around recognizing signs that their youth are struggling with mental health challenges, social challenges, or bullying. Students need to be educated as well around what is bullying, recognizing the difference between peer conflict and bullying, knowing the warning signs when adults need to be informed, and ways to intervene effectively when they see bullying, harassment or cyber bullying, or suicide warning signs.
  • Prevention: The key to successful intervention models is to include students as the core drivers when building programs that promote positive school cultures. There are existing local programs that can serve as models: Friendship Assistance Brigade, Stars, Be the One, and Welcoming Allies and Mentors.
  • Intervention: There is a need to educate school teaching staff and administrators about best practice around intervention when situations of conflict, bullying, harassment and cyber bullying occur—such as restorative practices as a way to support the target and to help the aggressor make changes. There is a need to offer strategies and tools to work with families in a way that promotes outcomes where everyone feels good about the process of addressing conflict and bullying situations.
  • Assessment: Schools need to conduct surveys about bullying to inform decisions for addressing the problem.

MacLeod also delivered a working group report on potential approaches for addressing bullying outside school property. He cited numerous ideas including holding an annual community forum and student leadership summit, providing training and information workshops, and launching awareness projects such as an annual Tompkins County Bullying Prevention Day.

Beth Hogan, a member of the Task Force’s Family Advisory Group, delivered a working group report on the concerns of parents surveyed by the group. She said parents experienced a significant increase in stress over bullying, and felt that they themselves were effectively being bullied. The parents believed that bullying was causing heightened levels of anxiety and depression in children, she added.

Hogan said that schools were reactive rather than proactive, and that mental health services inside and outside schools were inadequate. Hogan’s report called for frequent communication about bullying, including about the Dignity Act, to staff, families, and students. She said youth and parent involvement in bullying prevention should be a priority, and that the work should begin in the elementary grades.

Sophie Callister, a former student in the Lansing Central School District and now a student at Ithaca College, is the coordinator of the Task Force’s Student Advisory Group. “The bullying task force is something that means a huge deal to me because from third grade all through my school career it was a huge problem,” she said. “I want kids to feel like there is somebody willing to listen and help them and that they feel safe every day. I never really felt safe in school.” She said that rather than school counselors or psychologists the only person she felt she could go to for support was a math teacher. Callister said a goal of the task force is “to get the community involved—parents, students, everybody. This is not a time to be quiet.”

IMG_8545

Community Forum on Bullying Prevention, Tompkins County Public Library

Forum participants provided feedback and engaged in discussion in breakout sessions. On school programs, participants argued that schools under report bullying incidents and do not create safe spaces for students. They noted that teachers and coaches themselves sometimes engage in bullying by humiliating students/athletes. Participants suggested strategies including peer mentors and giving students tools for confronting bullying.

For public action, participants proposed holding local public forums within the county’s six school districts to better encourage family participation in bullying prevention initiatives. Participants supported the idea of providing training and workshop opportunities to educate the community about bullying and prevention methods, and called for a centralized resource to provide information about the Dignity Act and how to file complaints about bullying incidents. The participants also endorsed exploring synergies with existing programs and activities, such as the “Be the One” campaign.

Participants who focused on family and student involvement emphasized the need for developing a common language to understand bullying, and the importance of student-led initiatives for success. They noted that it was essential to view those who bully as people also in need of support to address the underlying causes of their behavior.

Some participants called for greater attention to students who may be experiencing suicide ideation, noting that four young people from the Lansing community have died by suicide in just the past year. Participants highlighted opportunities for students to become involved by forming chapters of organizations such as Active Minds and Sources of Strength, and participating in activities such as Mental Health First Aid for Teens.

Click here to read Becky Mehorter’s Ithaca Voice article on the Community Forum, “Task force brings community together to address bullying in local schools.”

Click here to read Matt Steecker’s article in the Ithaca Journal on the Tompkins County Bullying Prevention Task Force, “Finding solutions to bullying: Task force to hold forum at library.”

Click here to visit The Sophie Fund’s website resource page on bullying prevention.

A Little Help from Your Friends

Young people are often bewildered about mental health and mental illness, and Melanie Little loves explaining the difference to them. “When I asked high school students to define mental health, some of them didn’t know what to say,” said Little, director of Youth Services at the Mental Health Association in Tompkins County (MHA). “Others said it was ‘the wellbeing of the mind.’ Being mentally healthy is the ability to make positive decisions, cope with difficult emotions and enjoy one’s life, whereas mental illness is diagnosable and disrupts a person’s ability to carry out daily activities.”

melanielittle

Melanie Little and the Kids First Summer Camp

Little empathizes with struggling teens. She’s been there herself. Originally from Rochester, she battled mental illness during her youth.

As Little, 27, recalls her own experiences growing up, her mental health issues were not taken seriously. Adults blamed her discontent on typical teen mood swings. She didn’t fit the stereotypes around mental illness; she earned good grades and had close connections in her life. However, this did not alleviate the pain she felt or obviate her need for help. It was not until Little attended Ithaca College in 2009 that she finally reached out to receive treatment.

Little has always been interested in social justice and in striving to make positive change in the community. She yearned to provide guidance for young people in a way that she felt had been lacking in her own upbringing. She heard about MHA’s Kids First Summer Camp, a program designed for children ages 5-18 experiencing a wide range of internal or external struggles, and quickly signed up to become a camp counselor. It was a summer job, but turned out to be the first stepping stone in a career path as a community mental health educator and advocate.

At Kids First, Little learned valuable lessons about mental health and the significance of working directly with children. “Sometimes it feels like you are getting nowhere,” said Little. “Mental health can’t be fixed overnight. But, people don’t need to be ‘fixed.’ They just need to harness their strengths, which takes time. You have to trust yourself and trust the process. You don’t always get to see the progress, but you’re planting seeds.”

Over time, Little watched as the children in the summer camp began to open up and grow closer to their peers and the adult supervisors. She learned how to discipline and set limits for the children while remaining compassionate and empathetic about the kids’ variety of personalities and needs.

“A common misconception is that all children who struggle come from broken homes or have a lower socioeconomic status,” said Little. “However, some of the children had families that were perfectly stable and loving. Mental illness can be genetic or come from other external environmental factors. Mental health doesn’t exist in a vacuum.” Little finds it rewarding to work with children who she recognizes are capable of change and growth.

As the director of Youth Services, Little is responsible for a wide variety of tasks pertaining to community outreach, education and individual peer support and advocacy. Part of her community outreach involves visiting health classes in high schools and middle schools in the Ithaca City School District as a guest speaker in its mental health unit. She provides Mental Health and Wellness 101 courses for students, faculty, and parents. She also attends Parent Teacher Association meetings to educate adults. Little supervises recreational programs for young people at the MHA-affiliated Saturday Group Respite at the YMCA. She also carries out the Youth Wellness Recovery Action Plan (WRAP) that helps to decrease and prevent intrusive or troubling behaviors, increase personal empowerment, improve quality of life and help a young person take steps to achieve their goals.

In addition, Little serves MHA as a Mental Health First Aid instructor. She works to combat the stigma around mental illness and educates adults about how to recognize signs of mental illness and actively support family members, friends, colleagues, and others in a way that is non-judgmental. She informs trainees that “no one size fits all,” meaning each individual is different and must be treated with patience and care. She teaches that recovery is possible for everyone. MHA offers regular Mental Health First Aid courses for the general public. The Sophie Fund has sponsored special MHA training sessions for members of Ithaca’s food service community.

Although there tends to be more openness, progression, and awareness pertaining to mental health advocacy, Little believes that there is still an abundance of work to be done; she says that “roughly one in three Tompkins County high school students reported feeling sad or depressed most days.” Little intends to continue providing support, guidance, and mental health education for adolescents and adults. She believes that teaching about mental health and mental illness should be a crucial part of health classes in schools to have children understand their own minds from a younger age, and to grow into empathetic and aware adults. She also wants to take her advocacy work to the next level by going with a group of youth advocates to Albany to speak to legislators about providing more funding for mental health organizations and health classes in schools.

—By Nicole Kramer

Nicole Kramer, an intern at The Sophie Fund, is a Class of 2019 Writing major and Sociology minor at Ithaca College. She is a nonfiction editor for Stillwatera student-run literary magazine. She also enjoys creating mixed media image-text work and writing poetry. 

Why Care?

May is Mental Health Month, and a great time to celebrate the fantastic work done by organizations like the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) and its local chapter NAMI-Finger Lakes.

whycare-Instagram-46mil

NAMI is running a campaign throughout the month called “Why Care?” As NAMI explains it, the campaign is an opportunity to share the importance of mental health treatment, support and services to the millions of people, families, caregivers and loved ones affected by mental illness and a challenge to address broken systems and attitudes that present barriers to treatment and recovery.

From NAMI:

Care has the power to make a life-changing impact on those affected by mental health conditions. Through our own words and actions, we can shift the social and systemic barriers that prevent people from building better lives.

WhyCare?

Care is a simple 4-letter word, but a powerful way to change lives for people affected by mental illness.

It’s an action. It’s a feeling. It’s a gift we give to ourselves and to each other. People feel loved when someone cares. People feel heard when someone cares. People recover when someone cares. Society changes when people care. Entire systems change when people care. For more than 40 years, NAMI has been a beacon of help and hope by providing the support, education and advocacy to ensure that all people affected by mental health conditions get the care they need and deserve.

Central to the campaign is encouraging others to learn the facts about mental illness. NAMI’s goal is to bring mental health education to all corners of our communities. With education, people can identify warning signs of mental health conditions and help someone who may be struggling.

Navigating life with mental illness can be difficult, and NAMI wants to make it easier to find resources and people who care. The WhyCare? campaign features a webpage, sharable graphics and a downloadable emoji pack for smartphones— resources that can be used as a way to reach out to someone or to show your community that you care about those with mental illness.

By caring and working together, we can create positive change. We can shift the social and systemic barriers that prevent people from getting appropriate care and treatment. We can work towards a nation where everyone affected by mental illness can find the support and care they need to live healthy, fulfilling lives.

Tell the world why you care using the hashtags #WhyCare and #NAMIcares

To join NAMI’s Why Care? campaign, check here.

Click here to connect with NAMI-Finger Lakes.

Cornell’s Student Mental Health Review: “Disappointing”

In a letter emailed to Cornell University students on March 20, Ryan Lombardi, vice president for Student and Campus Life, announced long-awaited plans for a “comprehensive review” of student mental health.

IMG_4294

We support all steps to improve student mental health. We sincerely hope these plans will produce significant improvements. But it is with regret that we must express our disappointment with Vice President Lombardi’s announcement.

Nearly two years ago, after looking closely at student mental health policies and practices across the nation as well as at Cornell, we wrote to President Martha E. Pollack to respectfully seek a robust, independent, external-led review of the mental health challenges facing Cornell’s students as well as the university’s policies, programs, and practices to address them.

We wrote that we had observed systemic failure in Cornell mental health policy and practice, topped by a failure by Cornell administrators “to fully and openly recognize the magnitude of the mental health challenges facing Cornell, and to address them with best practices backed by human and financial resources commensurate to the scale.”

Our concerns are based partly on Cornell’s own data. The 2017 Cornell PULSE Survey of 5,001 undergraduates reported that 71.6 percent of respondents often or very often felt “overwhelmed,” and 42.9 percent said that they had been unable to function academically for at least a week on one or more occasions due to depression, stress, or anxiety. Nearly 10 percent of respondents reported being unable to function during a week-long period on five or more occasions. Nine percent of the respondents—about 450 students—reported “having seriously considered suicide at least once during the last year,” and about 85 students reported having actually attempted suicide at least once in the last year.

Vice President Lombardi’s announcement falls very short of what is needed to address Cornell’s mental health crisis and of what the Cornell administration promised when President Pollack announced the decision last September to conduct a review.

In brief, Vice President Lombardi’s announcement said that the review will be handled by two separate entities. One is an “external review team” to look at clinical mental health services—Cornell’s Counseling and Psychological Services (CAPS). The other is a “university committee” comprised of students, faculty and staff to examine “the ways in which the campus environment and culture contribute to mental health challenges at Cornell.” 

Lack of urgency; lack of a holistic approach; lack of independence, transparency, and accountability; lack of full mandate, scope, and goals; such aspects of the announcement highlight our concerns about the strength of the Cornell administration’s commitment to student mental health.

Lack of Urgency

Some background puts the March 20 announcement in perspective. President Pollack announced in September 2018 that Cornell would undertake a “comprehensive review” of student mental health. It was then only last week, seven months into the academic year, that the Cornell administration finally outlined plans for the review in a late-night, mid-week, out-of-the-blue email to students.

It may also be noted that after we first wrote to the Cornell President seeking a review of student mental health, it took 10 months for the administration to respond with a clear answer, and President Pollack’s answer at that time was “No.”

In that January 2018 response, President Pollack pointed instead to an “external assessment” then being conducted by The JED Foundation, JED’s on-site visit to the Cornell campus in the summer of 2017, and Cornell’s “ongoing engagement with the foundation to ensure we are providing holistic support.”

We wrote to President Pollack again in August 2018, arguing that the JED review was “plainly insufficient.” We noted that the review (or the parts of it that Cornell had chosen to make public) included no findings, and that its recommendations had not addressed 1) CAPS services; 2) Cornell’s suicide prevention policy; 3) community mental health provider services to Cornell students; 4) academic workloads; 5) or faculty and staff handling of students in distress.

Throughout 2018, two student organizations—the undergraduate Cornell Mental Health Task Force and Cornell Graduate Students United—made extraordinary efforts to seek an independent review and to advocate for specific improvements for student mental health.

With the March 20 announcement, the Cornell administration seems to have lost an entire academic year of time for a comprehensive review. Cornell’s 10-day spring break starts this week, and then only five weeks are left until the last day of spring semester classes.

Lack of a Holistic Approach

Vice President Lombardi’s announcement suggests that the Cornell administration has decided against going forward with a true comprehensive review; the announcement indicates a preference instead for a review that is modest and incremental.

The plans outlined on March 20 fragment the review into at least two compartments, rather than establishing a centralized task force to review all Cornell mental health matters in their “comprehensive” entirety. This is at odds with President Pollack’s statements that Cornell would undertake a “comprehensive” and a “holistic” review of student mental health.

We along with others have called for a task force to conduct a comprehensive review due to the interconnectedness and complexity of student mental health challenges. The challenges deal strongly with CAPS clinical services but hardly with CAPS alone; the scope of a comprehensive review must examine university policies, administration commitment, academic culture, campus climate, community mental health services—and the intersection of all these areas.

Lack of Independence, Transparency, and Accountability

The March 20 plans lack a structure or mechanism to ensure the independence of the review, such as the appointment of a recognized external expert as task force chair (or co-chair), who would oversee all elements of the review and report directly and only to the Cornell President; the Cornell administration, rather, seems intent on a review with ambiguous lines of authority and accountability that is guided and closely controlled by the administration itself.

The March 20 announcement said nothing about the charge that the review teams have been given; about who authorized the fragmented review plans; about who appointed the members of the two entities that will conduct the review; or about which university authority the review teams will report to, and by what deadline.

The announcement also failed to identify all but two members of the review teams—nothing was said about the appointment of specific external mental health experts, student leaders, or Ithaca community stakeholders. This lack of transparency (or efficiency) suggests the absence of a strong mandate.

Vice President Lombardi did announce the appointment of co-chairs for the campus environment committee—two associate deans who are both new to Cornell and to Ithaca. Typically, university officials at the vice president and vice provost levels have been assigned leadership roles on mental health task forces at peer institutions.

The March 20 announcement made no commitment to transparently releasing all reports related to the review.

Lack of Full Mandate, Scope, and Goals

The March 20 announcement said nothing about the mandate, scope, and goals given to the clinical mental health services external review team and the campus environment committee. The announcement makes no mention of mandating the two review entities to report findings or make recommendations.

Vice President Lombardi said that the clinical mental health services external review team will “evaluate our services.” With such a vague and narrow mandate, the team may not be empowered to review the many budgetary and other policies that affect the services, or the services provided to Cornell students on referral off campus by community providers.

Vice President Lombardi said that the campus environment committee “will gather information” about the environment and culture at Cornell. With such a meager mandate, the committee may not be empowered to examine the plethora of policies and practices related to mental health (suicide prevention, student disabilities, academic pressure, alcohol and other drug services, residential life, sexual assault, hazing, vulnerable population groups, education and awareness, emergency response)—and their interconnectedness—with the required rigor and vigor.

Lack of Resolve

All this leads us to worry about a lack of resolve in addressing student mental health at Cornell. We continue to have concerns about “an institutional mindset reflecting complacency and defensiveness,” as we wrote to President Pollack nearly two years ago.

We are disappointed by the President’s hesitation and delays in moving forward with a comprehensive review. We were surprised when she declined our request in 2017 to meet with us to discuss our concerns and suggestions. In December, Robert S. Harrison, chairman of the Cornell University Board of Trustees, also declined our request to address the board on student mental health at its meeting in Ithaca scheduled for March 22.

Last fall, we welcomed President Pollack’s announcement that Cornell would conduct a comprehensive review of student mental health. What we said then remains our belief—and our hope:

“There is a mounting mental health crisis facing our young people today, and the goal of the comprehensive review should be not merely to tinker with the existing system but to create a gold standard for supporting student mental health in the years to come. As one of the world’s leading research institutions, Cornell should expect no less of itself.

“We continue to stress the importance of a truly independent, robust, and transparent review, led by an external expert—a recognized public health authority with a strong background in mental health and without any current or previous ties to Cornell. This is vital, both to ensure the best possible outcome and to win the confidence of Cornell students and the wider campus and Ithaca communities that the university administration is doing its utmost to support student mental health.”

—By Scott MacLeod and Susan Hack

Scott MacLeod and Susan Hack are co-founders of The Sophie Fund, a non-profit organization supporting mental health initiatives aiding young people in the greater Ithaca community. The Sophie Fund was established in memory of their daughter, Sophie, a Cornell fine arts student who died by suicide in 2016 while on a health leave of absence.

UPDATE 4/1/19

Cornell Health posted further information about the mental health review on its website:

Cornell’s comprehensive review of mental health

In September of 2018, the Office of the President announced that the university would be conducting a comprehensive review of student mental health, stating that “Cornell Health will work with the campus community during the fall 2018 semester to determine the appropriate scope for a comprehensive review of student mental health at Cornell, anticipating that such a review could potentially begin in early 2019.”

Over the course of fall 2018, feedback was solicited from a wide range of student, staff, and faculty stakeholders, including the university-wide Coalition on Mental Health.The consensus was that the comprehensive review should include two broad themes:

Exploring how best to meet the growing clinical needs of students facing mental health problems

Identifying ways in which the campus environment / campus culture might change to better support student mental health

Cornell’s comprehensive review will be conducted by two different groups working in concert with each other:

A university Mental Health Review Committee composed of staff, students (undergraduate, graduate, and professional), and faculty
An external team of expert evaluators (members to be announced soon)

Upcoming timeline:

This spring 2019, the university is in the process of finalizing membership in the Mental Health Review Committee, and will convene the committee and refine questions to explore with key stakeholders. The committee co-chairs (Miranda Swanson, Associate Dean for Student Services in the College of Engineering and Marla Love, Senior Associate Dean for Diversity and Equity in the Dean of Students Office) will also develop a plan for gathering campus input and collaborate with external reviewers to plan site visits. Between Fall 2019 and Spring 2020, the Mental Health Review Committee will conduct a ‘Listening Tour’ of campus; the external reviewers will conduct their site visits, and submit a written report.

More details will be added to this page soon.

Cornell Health also posted information about “Upcoming changes to Cornell Health’s counseling services”:

Cornell Health is planning changes to student mental health services to provide more rapid access to care. These changes are in response to student feedback and a growing demand for services, and were first announced in a message to the student body on March 20, 2019.

We are adapting a model of care currently in place at Brown University that has proven successful in supporting seamless and rapid access to mental health services.

Beginning in Fall 2019:

Students can have access to same-day counseling appointments (or next-day appointments, if they contact us in the afternoon)
Students will have flexibility in who they see: they can select a therapist based on convenience (i.e., whomever has an opening on a given day at a specific time), or wait to see a therapist of their choosing
Students who are interested in continued counseling will be able to select half-hour or hour-long appointments (students’ counselors will partner with them in determining the frequency and length of appointments that will meet their needs)
Students will have increased access to psychotropic medication management services

How we plan to accommodate these changes:

Beginning fall 2019, every therapist’s day will include time slots for same-day appointments. These same-day appointments will be focused on addressing immediate needs and problem-solving. We will gain much of this time in the schedule by converting the “brief assessment” telephone screenings and the traditional “CAPS intake” appointments into times that can be scheduled to directly address the student’s concern.

Additionally, we will offer half-hour counseling appointments along with the traditional hour-long appointments to increase the number of appointments available each day. We anticipate the rapid access and the flexibility built into this new model will be a welcome change for students.

More details will be added to this page soon.