Putting Parents in Control of School Counseling - Why I support HB2862
For the first time ever we have a chance to finally regulate school-based mental health services to mandate informed parental consent, transparency and parental authority - here's how it works
In a few short hours after Matt Gress dropped HB2862 and I voiced my unqualified support - I've received pushback from some corners on the Right.
Won't this lead to more mental health programs, more money to mental health that could be used on instruction? Why not ban mental health programs altogether?
I've been researching and writing on this topic for 2 years - increased spending on mental health programs is negatively correlated with lower academic scores. Tons of independent research studies show these programs neither improve academic outcomes nor prevent depression or anxiety - at scale. Money diverted from core academic instruction programs is not just bad spending policy, it is ineffective at even accomplishing what proponents say they do.
And - and this is key - school counseling programs have run amok over parental rights. While every district varies, there are too many cases where school staff make secret referrals for service, where students meet for one-on-one counseling without parental consent or even knowledge. There are cases of counselors doggedly pursuing a child to enter counseling over the objections of a parent. And once a counselor gets behind closed doors with a student, no one really knows what they do. It's like a black box.
What these school counselors and social workers are doing is prohibited in private practice where strict regulations exist to ensure parents (1) control when and whether to engage a professional, and (2) receive informed, written consent to treatment that specifies what happens behind closed doors - so, why are they allowed to do it in schools - with children?
The reason why school districts get away with this is because SCHOOL COUNSELING PROGRAMS ARE WHOLLY UNREGULATED.
Counselors and social workers are typically not board licensed, they are not mandated by law to obtain your consent or refrain from practicing in areas for which they are unqualified. And they are not subject to oversight by a professional health regulatory board with the power to investigate complaints, discipline licensees, and regulate unprofessional and unethical conduct.
School mental health personnel just follow district policy and report to administrators like any other educator. If a district has no policy, they are free to roam the halls looking to identify a child for counseling services that justifies the grant money used to hire them. And because they work in schools, they have almost unfettered access to the children.
That is wholly unacceptable.
Moreover, school boards have no visibility into these programs. They aren't asked whether they want to have them at all. Administrators just bring new hire plans for more counselors and social worker "support staff" and boards just rubber stamp them.
No one asks the board to actually approve mental health services in the first place. It's just taken for granted that schools districts provide them. This puts the administrators in charge, not duly elected board members accountable to the voters. That must change.
Again, that is wholly unacceptable.
So, what can we realistically do?
The reality is that school-based mental health programs exist, there's enormous amounts of funding behind them (ed. note: for now…they could be DOGED soon), and, in the current political climate, banning them outright is a political non-starter in any state with a Democrat governor holding a veto pen. The democrat party is all-in on these services and they are exploiting this unregulated loophole to expand these programs.
So, what's the best, realistic alternative to an outright ban?
The answer is regulate them. And that's what HB2862 does. No more secret referrals. No more secret counseling sessions. Here's how:
Schools boards are now - for the first time - told they must approve whether a district will provide mental health services to all general education students. Some boards will agree, some boards will decide to get out of the mental health business - that is foundational to local control and Arizona is a local control state - for good reason.
IF a board elects to provide these services, they must do so in a manner consistent with the fundamental rights of parents to direct their child's upbringing, education, health and mental care. Parents, not school districts, make those decisions.
IF a board elects to provide these services, they must implement a long list of policy mandates on parental consent and control that ensures parents are fully informed and sign-off on every referral and intervention, including:
Even universal screening programs will require their consent - no more secret tracking of students' mental health by staff that goes into a database somewhere on some software platform for SEL monitoring
If a staff makes a referral for counseling, they must notify the parent and identify the need for an intervention and seek their prior written consent
Before conducting an intervention, staff must prepare for parent approval a written intervention plan that discloses what the intervention is designed to do
The plan must disclose what methods will be used
The plan must disclose what assessments, tests or other screening tools will be used - and explain parents have a right to obtain copies of those screening tools in advance for approval
The plan must disclose who is providing the intervention
The plan must disclose what are the staff's qualifications - and if unlicensed by a professional board, a statement that they are unlicensed and not qualified to diagnosis or treat a mental condition
The plan must disclose who they will share information with about the interventions, and their contact details
The plan must disclose that, if they are using software to track mental health, all that data shall be available to the parent for inspection
The plan must disclose, if applicable, that a district is using a student intern who hasn't graduated from college yet
The plan must disclose THAT A PARENT MAY WITHDRAW CONSENT AT ANYTIME and pull out of the intervention
In addition, all records related to the intervention, including notes, reports, handouts, communications, all of it - shall be available to parents as education records upon request.
School districts will also be required to publish on its website a description of offered mental health services - with a prominent and conspicuous notice that school counselors and social workers who are not licensed by the state Board of Behavioral Health may not engage in the practice of behavioral health and may not diagnose or treat any mental condition. The disclaimer will also specify that school psychologists are not required to be licensed by the Board of Psychologists Examiners, and that interns are working at the district as part of a course of university study.
Because mental health services implicate the fundamental rights of parents, violations of these policies shall be grounds for discipline, including suspension, termination, and potentially, referral to the State Board of Education for unprofessional conduct. Parents shall also have the right to bring a lawsuit for violation of parental rights.
Finally, HB2862 recognizes that students may, on their own, seek out counseling services. But HB2862 mandates that unless the student is a victim of conduct that RISES TO THE LEVEL OF MANDATORY REPORTING, the school must go back to the parent and obtain their written consent on an intervention plan. The parent maintains control.
Same with students that are in immediate danger to self or others - school mental health staff can attend to the immediate danger without calling home, but if they refer the student to counseling, they must again go through all the notification, disclosures, and written consent procedures outlined above.
No more secret referrals. No more secret counseling sessions. Unless the child is being abused as defined by the mandatory reporting laws - in which case, law enforcement must be called in - the parent maintains authority and control.
That is why I am supporting HB2862.
End.