Bill Overview
Title: Pride in Mental Health Act
Description: This bill expands programs that prevent and treat child abuse and neglect to address issues facing youth who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning, nonbinary, or gender-variant members of indigenous communities (e.g., Two Spirit). Specifically, these programs include (1) research and reporting requirements, (2) providing technical assistance, (3) grants to states and local agencies to train child-welfare personnel, and (4) community-based prevention-service grants. The bill also establishes a grant program to provide mental and behavioral health resources for such youth, including trauma-informed care.
Sponsors: Rep. Davids, Sharice [D-KS-3]
Target Audience
Population: LGBTQ+ and gender-variant youth, including indigenous communities
Estimated Size: 2000000
- The bill specifically targets youth who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning, nonbinary, or gender-variant.
- It also targets indigenous communities, including members who identify as Two Spirit.
- The bill aims to address child abuse and neglect issues, which generally affect minors, a population estimated based on global youth demographics.
- The community-based programs and grant initiatives suggest the target population resides in communities where such services can be applied, meaning areas with significant indigenous and LGBTQ+ youth populations will be prioritized ones.
Reasoning
- The population targeted by this policy includes LGBTQ+ and gender-variant youth, particularly within indigenous communities. This demographic is relatively small compared to the overall US population but significant in terms of facing unique challenges.
- The policy budget allows for a moderate expansion of mental health services, focusing on community-based approaches and trauma-informed care, which are crucial for the wellbeing of the target group.
- Given the focus on child abuse, neglect prevention, and mental health, immediate impacts may be seen in increased access to resources and a sense of support for affected individuals.
- The long-term effects are expected to yield higher wellbeing scores due to sustained prevention programs and mental health resource availability.
- The commonness of affected individuals is fairly specific, reflecting a focus on vulnerable minorities within the US.
- Not all LGBTQ+ youth will feel a direct impact, especially if they do not live in the targeted communities or if the implementation of the policy does not reach them.
Simulated Interviews
High school student (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 16 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the policy is a good idea because it provides resources I need.
- Mental health support is crucial for people like us who often feel neglected.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Student (Rural South Dakota)
Age: 15 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this means we'll have more counselors who actually understand our culture.
- I feel hopeful about the policy because it could help our youth feel less alone.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Part-time worker, student (Chicago, Illinois)
Age: 17 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's important to address mental health issues specifically for us, rather than general info.
- Hopefully, more trainings mean less discrimination from school staff.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Middle school student (Portland, Oregon)
Age: 12 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Even though my family is supportive, I still feel pressure at school.
- If the policy educates more people, maybe things will be easier for kids like me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Student (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 14 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This kind of policy could make our advocacy programs even stronger.
- I see this as an opportunity to connect resources with students who hide their identities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
College student (New York City, New York)
Age: 18 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The focus on mental health is exactly what many students need when they're just out of high school.
- I hope colleges will partner with these programs to help new students.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Middle school student (Miami, Florida)
Age: 13 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's nice to know there's something in place for kids like me especially if things change at home.
- School support would be awesome through trainings.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Part-time job, seeking mental health support (Austin, Texas)
Age: 19 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My hope is this policy brings real mental support to those in overlooked communities.
- I think consistent help is needed for real change.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
High school student (Salt Lake City, Utah)
Age: 16 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could bring much-needed representation in our community programs.
- Feeling seen by these services could improve my daily life.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Student leader (San Francisco, California)
Age: 17 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- A structured policy can add depth to our ongoing initiatives.
- While we have a lot of resources, formal support and guidance will push us further.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $180000000)
Year 2: $155000000 (Low: $124000000, High: $186000000)
Year 3: $160000000 (Low: $128000000, High: $192000000)
Year 5: $170000000 (Low: $136000000, High: $204000000)
Year 10: $185000000 (Low: $148000000, High: $222000000)
Year 100: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Key Considerations
- Comprehensive implementation requires collaboration with indigenous communities and LGBTQ+ advocacy groups.
- Monitoring and evaluation are critical to measure efficacy and determine any necessary adjustments in funding and focus.
- Potential challenges include training sufficient numbers of staff and adapting programs to diverse community contexts.