On September 16, 2025, a fresh debate ignited in the United States over the role of schools in supporting children’s mental health. U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Education Secretary Linda McMahon published a joint opinion piece, urging schools to abandon mental health screenings and therapy programs in favor of what they called “natural sources of mental well-being.” Their argument, outlined in both The Washington Post and NPR, has drawn sharp criticism from mental health experts and educators who say the proposal risks undermining children’s well-being at a time when support is needed most.
The controversy centers around a new Illinois law signed by Governor JB Pritzker, which mandates that all schools in the state offer mental health screening tests beginning with third graders. These screenings rely on standardized questionnaires designed to gauge students’ feelings and overall well-being. According to Kennedy and McMahon, such screenings “medicalize the unique and sometimes unpredictable behavior of young children,” potentially creating “new stigmas that students might carry with them for life.” They argue, “We must make American children healthy again without treating them all like patients.”
In their September 11, 2025, opinion piece titled “Physical health should come before mental health at school,” Kennedy and McMahon doubled down on this stance, suggesting that annual mental health screenings in schools transform the normal ups and downs of childhood into lasting stigma. Their prescription: return to basics—strong families, good nutrition, fitness, and hope for the future.
However, mental health professionals interviewed by NPR and cited in The Washington Post have pushed back forcefully. Psychologist Mary Alvord, founder of Alvord Baker and Associates and a consultant for schools in the Washington, D.C. area, emphasized that screenings actually help reduce stigma, not create it. “They are awareness and conversation-starters,” Alvord explained. “Stigma is when you don’t talk about it and you hide it. And then you make it so people don’t want to talk about it and they don’t want to then deal with it.”
Alvord and other experts argue that school-based mental health screenings normalize conversations around mental health, raise awareness, and encourage students to seek help. Far from singling out children or labeling them, these universal screenings provide valuable insights into the challenges students are facing—insights that can inform broader school programs aimed at improving emotional resilience and connectedness.
Dr. Vera Feuer, director of child psychiatry at Northwell Health and an advisor to several Long Island school districts, clarified a key point often misunderstood in the debate. “Most schools doing school-wide mental health screens usually aren’t screening for a specific mental health condition. Instead, they’re aiming for a wider lens into students’ well-being and struggles,” Feuer noted. These tools are often called “wellness surveys” or “school climate surveys,” and their purpose is to give schools a window into how children are coping. This information enables schools to bring in evidence-based strategies and programs that can boost student mental health as a whole.
Another common misconception, according to experts, is that screenings are diagnostic. Dr. Feuer and psychologist Benjamin Miller both stressed that these questionnaires are not designed to diagnose mental health conditions. “Screeners are brief assessments that identify this population at risk,” Miller explained. “They’re not diagnostic, and they require us to take an additional step to know, to find out more information and the most appropriate course of action.”
For students flagged by a screening, the next step might be a meeting with a school counselor or nurse for further assessment. Most students won’t need a referral to outside care, but for those who do, early identification can be crucial. As Dr. Feuer pointed out, “The prevalence of mental health disorders is high. A lot of the disorders do start before age 15. We know that the rates have increased [in recent years].” Early detection through school-based screenings can help connect vulnerable children to care before their symptoms escalate into a crisis.
Yet, even when a need for care is identified, access remains a significant hurdle. As Feuer told NPR, “The biggest barrier continues to be even when things are diagnosed, the actual access to care is still very, very difficult in most places in this country.” Shortages of mental health providers mean many children face long waits or limited options for support, a reality that underscores the importance of early screening and intervention.
Kennedy and McMahon’s advocacy for “natural sources of mental well-being”—nutrition, social interaction, sleep, and family support—finds some agreement among experts, but with a major caveat. “They’re actually part of a really important mental health promotion plan,” Feuer acknowledged. But, as Alvord cautioned, “It’s not everything. You can be eating and sleeping well and still have mental health challenges.”
Experts also highlight that school-based mental health screenings are no different in principle from other routine health checks conducted in schools, such as vision and hearing tests. Miller, a board advisor for the mental health advocacy group Inseparable, noted, “We screen all the time in schools for things like vision and hearing. So it makes a lot of sense that we would just continue to screen for things that are equally as important, like our mental health.”
The debate has not gone unnoticed in the broader public sphere. On September 15, 2025, The Washington Post published an opinion commentary responding to Kennedy and McMahon’s arguments. The response emphasized that supporting mental health is not about labeling children but about helping them thrive. It also pointed out the interconnectedness of mental and physical health, arguing that both are essential for children’s well-being.
Despite mounting criticism from mental health experts, Kennedy and McMahon have not elaborated further on their plans for addressing children’s mental health. NPR reached out to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for comment but did not receive a response by the deadline.
As the conversation continues, the stakes remain high. With mental health disorders often emerging before age 15 and rates on the rise, early detection and intervention can make a profound difference in a child’s life. While nutrition, family support, and physical health are undeniably important, experts say they are not substitutes for evidence-based mental health support. The future of school-based mental health programs—and the well-being of millions of American children—may well depend on how this debate is resolved in the months ahead.
For now, the question remains: Should schools step back from mental health screenings, or should they double down on efforts to support the emotional and psychological health of their students? The answer, experts suggest, could shape the next generation’s ability to thrive, both in and out of the classroom.