Running head: THE MENTAL HEALTH PANDEMIC 1
The Mental Health Pandemic
Mary Glassmire
Chestnut Hill College
THE MENTAL HEALTH PANDEMIC 2
Abstract
The importance of providing government assistance for underserved communities has been a
long-overdue topic that little has been done to aid these individuals. The federal government
distributes funds throughout each state and stops their involvement after funds are released, and
there lies the problems that follow this decision. Budget cuts are taken from mental health
services due to different states believing other matters are more important than mental health aid.
Since there are not enough funds distributed to mental health, staffing has been severely
decreased, allowing untrained professionals to assist people with mental health disorders
inadequately. As we progress as a society, it is essential to acknowledge that medicine is not our
only solution in preventing and supporting mental health problems from occurring. Neglecting
this statement will only increase the number of individuals who could benefit from non-
pharmaceutical treatments. This review of the lack of the federal government’s involvement with
mental health aid will negatively affect individuals by increasing mental health symptoms and
creating financial hardships.
THE MENTAL HEALTH PANDEMIC 3
The Mental Health Pandemic
The early history of mental illness can date back to the fifth century B.C. when
Hippocrates was treating the mentally ill with techniques that better suited the patients, such as
environmental change or administering certain substances as medications (Unite For Sight, n.d).
After that, negative attitudes persisted through the 18th century leading to the stigmatization of
mental illness and the confinement of those suffering from their ailments. Mistreatment
continued until activist Dorothea Dix petitioned for better living conditions amongst patients in
hospitals and treatment by professional staff, then the U.S government-funded thirty-two state
psychiatric hospitals (Unite For Sight, n.d). Although institutionalized care increased patient
access to mental health services, the state hospitals were often underfunded and understaffed.
Today there are more options for people who suffer from mental issues through inpatient and
outpatient care. However, there are currently still problems that will persist without regular
involvement from the government making decisions about how money should be spent
throughout each state (Unite For Sight, n.d). Budget cuts have even been suggested to the already
underfunded mental health services. Since the mental health community is deprived of funds, the
federal government attempts to compensate them by allowing untrained employees to perform
mental health professionals’ occupations. While all of this takes place, funds that could serve this
community, such as psychotherapy, instead goes towards medications and no other resources.
Lack of resources creates stressful experiences that can be difficult for anyone to handle, and
even coping mechanisms familiar to a person can become ineffective.
Additionally, when faced with harsh circumstances, personality and mood can be
negatively affected and could lead to future mental problems that worsen over time (Bolger et
al., 1989). Chronic stress is a crucial indicator that an individual’s sanity levels have been
THE MENTAL HEALTH PANDEMIC 4
compromised and should be handled swiftly. Money is not a source of happiness but is a means
to survive, and studies have found a link between structural discrimination and poverty (Centers
for Disease, 2013). Undoubtedly, the government’s lack of funding for mental health services
dramatically affects all age groups by increasing mental health symptoms and financial
hardships. The federal, state governments, and the U.S states coincide to address mental health
concerns. The role of the federal government regarding mental health includes distributing funds
contingent upon minimum requirements states must obey, protecting consumers’ rights, release
funds for these services, and support research (The Federal, n.d). Ultimately, states must meet
the minimum requirements determined by the federal government as acceptable for mental health
services. Once the minimum requirement is met, states can pull additional funding from the
mental health budget and use the remaining funds for other state relations and neglect mental
health concerns.
Medicaid is a federal health coverage plan for millions of eligible Americans that helps
with medical costs (Centers for Medicare, n.d). The federal government requires each state to
cover certain groups of individuals, including low-income families, pregnant women, children,
and other eligible individuals to receive Supplemental Security Income (Medicaid.gov, n.d).
Once these groups are covered, depending on their financial eligibility, the states can determine
who else can receive full coverage or out of pocket sharing. Financial eligibility is based on the
Affordable Care Act (ACT). Recent events programs such as ACT have allowed a massive
increase in Medicaid coverage for lower-income brackets and upper-lower income brackets
(Centers for Medicare, n.d). However, there are still low-income families who do not qualify
because their income is slightly higher or too ill to seek treatment. For example, people
diagnosed as schizophrenic view some forms of medications as harmful to their body when in
THE MENTAL HEALTH PANDEMIC 5
actuality, it is not. By law, it is illegal to force someone to take medications unless they are in a
facility (Tarrier et al., 1998). Since one cannot oppress someone to medicate, it makes it
particularly difficult for schizophrenic patients to receive in-patient care. This is because there is
little funding in resolving this matter, and they can refuse treatment or not seek treatment at all
(Tarrier et al., 1998). As this is a reoccurring issue ensuring financing for mental health services
and the resources that came along are vital; making budget cuts will only increase this rising
issue. Yet, individual states are allowed to take from the mental health budget and additional
budget cuts are still being made.
Budget Cuts
The 2011 shootings and killing of six victims, including Congresswoman Gabrielle
Gifford’s, focused national attention on the public mental health system. Gifford’s was a
Congresswoman in Arizona advocating for gun control until she had to resign due to severe brain
injury caused by an assassination attempt (National State, 2011). Unfortunately, this tragedy
struck because adolescents and young adults often are neglected by essential mental health
services and support. Services are typically unavailable or inaccessible for those who would
benefit the most (National State, 2011). Jared Loughner, the responsible party of six deaths and
fourteen injuries, has undiagnosed schizophrenia and suffered from mental health budget cuts.
During this period, massive budget cuts from 2009 to 2011 were reduced from the mental health
budget. Since these cuts have occurred, it was nearly impossible for Loughner’s family to access
those services. People like Loughner are unsurprisingly still not receiving services they
desperately need (National State, 2011). Regrettably, this will not be the last case of scarce
resources on account of the government’s lack of management of the mental health budget. The
need for mental health will consistently be greater than the supply. Families endeavoring to get
THE MENTAL HEALTH PANDEMIC 6
publicly funded services for their children are frequently tasked to wait for benefits they may
never receive (Reid & Brown, 2008). In the US, with the appearance of managed care, wellbeing
upkeep association, and medical care associations, cost control has been accomplished by
lessening installments to professionals, diminishing inpatient administrations’ opportunities, and
capitation of wages (Reid & Brown, 2008). To support increase funding, numerous individuals
seeking more justice have put forth different strategies to advocate and campaign at all degrees
of government, with limited achievement. Most organizations had enhanced their wellsprings of
income through raising support, awards, and subcontracts, including offices that had recruited
staff explicitly to raise money. Raising support activities included: theater occasions, carport
deals, and so forth. The subsidizing difficulties frequently brought about new associations, which
numerous members felt had some beneficial impacts (Reid & Brown, 2008). For instance, one
member was forced to depict an organization between their children’s psychological service or
child welfare (Reid & Brown, 2008). Cost regulation within mental health care has diminished
specialists’ capacity to satisfy the need for these services. Budget cuts are reduced from
practitioners and their subordinates; therefore, staffing is insufficient.
Insufficient Staff
Over 40 million American adults have a mental health condition. Moreover, 56% of
American adults with mental health conditions have not received mental health services (Nguyen
& Davis, 2017). The problem persists because the state’s workforces have a ratio of one mental
health worker to one-thousand individuals, including psychologists, social workers, counselors,
and psychiatric nurses combined. Considering mental health services are underfunded, this
creates a high demand for out of pocket pay for these practitioners to be sufficiently paid.
Unfortunately, this means numerous providers do not accept insurance, constraining families,
THE MENTAL HEALTH PANDEMIC 7
and individuals to pay high out of pocket fees or abandon care (Nguyen & Davis, 2017). Even
though the current accentuation in improving mental health facilities is centered around
evidence-based care and medication, numerous communities are battling to discover providers to
allocate support for equal treatment amongst all patients. A prerequisite to providing care is the
availability of providers.
One myth towards increasing primary care providers is that they can fill the missing
mental health specialists’ positions. This misbelief impacts the measure of the time these
specialists have available to deliver mental health care before symptoms increase (Merwin et al.,
2003). There should be harmony between short-term solutions for current aptitude deficiencies
and medium to longer-term solutions (job redesign, holistic approaches) that address extended
deficiencies to decrease health workforce expertise shortages (Kilpatrick et al., 2007). Short-term
