Preventing Mental Health Conditions Should be a National Priority
A report by the National Research Council and Institute of Medicine states that the federal government should make preventing mental, emotional, and behavioral disorders and promoting mental health in young people a national priority. According to the authors, there is currently no clear federal body to lead efforts in mental health prevention, despite the fact that there is ample evidence to support the effectiveness of a prevention model of mental health. It prioritizes the need to give individuals who are at risk the “best available evidence-based interventions prior to the onset of the disorder,” and “the promotion of positive mental, emotional, and behavioral development for all children, youth, and young adults” (p.1).
In order to adopt a prevention-focused framework to address mental health issues, the report recommends that several specific interventions be adopted in areas such as family functioning, early childhood experiences, and social skills. Plus, there needs to be increased efforts to reduce risk for children exposed to serious adversities such as poverty and family disruption. Although genetics are seen as a relevant area of study, the report states, “it is now recognized that most disorders are not caused by a small number of genes” (p.5), and thus mental health research should focus more on environmental factors and the intersection of neuroscience and social characteristics.
Questions for Discussion:
- Does this focus on prevention over treatment surprise you?
- In your opinion, what are the most effective strategies to prevent mental health conditions?
- What can the federal government do, if anything, to increase the mental health of its citizens?
- Are you concerned that a focus on prevention will take away resources from the treatment of mental health conditions?
Your thoughts…
Comments:
 While I believe whole heartedly in prevention and deeply support funding early efforts, I am slightly troubled about the movement for infant mental health and infant-parent psychotherapy. Not because I don't believe that it isn't of any benefit, but because I am bewildered that supportive clinicians don't seem to realize that the at-risk population that would most benefit from it are highly unlikely to seek or use this service. Think about it. Posted Wednesday, March 11, 2009 at 02:57 PM
Training is needed for clinicians to practice in the area of infant-parent psychotherapy. This practice area is not limited to psychologists or psychiatrists. Infant mental health is a multidisciplinary field. Early recognition, assessment and intervention in troubled infant-parent relationships has been proven to reduce the likelihood of later antisocial behaviors and mental illnesses. As was stated in an earlier comment. The response you get from those in state government who should be dealing with this need is that funds must be spent on current programs and crises. Posted Wednesday, March 11, 2009 at 02:41 PM
I have spent 35 years serving children and families across many cultures with quality mental health and training services. RTC, inpatient, outpatient, juvenile justice you name it.
I am currently working in the area of adult consumer mental health initiatives.
While I find the work very stimulating, it is disturbibg to notice that there seems to be a line of demarcation among adult practioners about children & families that seems to me almost completely artificial in nature. Comments such as "we don't do kids" are typically heard even when you are talking about late adolescence in state agencies and among providers.
Perhaps it's just me, but all of it seems contextual,on a continuum and developmentally based.
Is it just the nature of funding or is the divide more fundamental? There really can't be a hole in somebody else's side of the boat when it comes to national mental health issues. Posted Wednesday, March 11, 2009 at 12:20 PM
Parenting is not an innate skill, and in families in which the parents have been exposed to poor parenting as they grew up, the likelihood of a health-encouraging environment is reduced. Quality home visiting programs with a strong parenting component should be beneficial. However, we should be doing more to get students in high school to learn more about brain development during pregnancy and factors, e.g. alcohol, that can negatively affect the brain.
I am more concerned that the rationale given for money not being available for prevention is that we have crises that have to be treated now. Meanwhile, because we are not preventing new problems, they simply continue to grow and grow. Posted Tuesday, March 10, 2009 at 06:39 PM
Increase activity level beginning with young children in proven programs that enhance learning and development. Imbed these programs into preschools thru high school on a daily basis. Allow children time to interact thru recess. Start school at a later time, especially for teenagers who need more sleep. Include music at all levels of schooling, thru listening and playing. Once you have a balanced brain, then the real academic learning can take off. Posted Tuesday, March 10, 2009 at 04:49 PM
Post a Comment:
Return to
Current Featured Discussions Page Top |
