Intervening in this way, particularly if early in development, may serve to interrupt some of the pathways that lead from risk factors to mental disorder. Although a strong proponent of universal approaches, Rose acknowledged that an effective prevention strategy should also encompass selective and indicated approaches320. If the whole population distribution could be shifted to the left, then more occurrences of suicidal thoughts and non‐suicidal self‐injury would be prevented than using a strategy focused on the few at highest risk315. While those with very high distress values (three standard deviations above the mean) are at highest relative risk, the majority of these outcomes occur in those at medium risk – one or two standard deviations above the mean. As an example, Polek et al315 showed the implications of a normally distributed risk factor (e.g., mental distress) for the occurrence of suicidal thoughts and non‐suicidal self‐injury in a sample of adolescents and young adults. Rose’s argument309, more cases of disorder in a population may be prevented by intervening at lower levels of exposure in the general population than by targeting high‐risk groups.
We must actively engage young people and their families in conversations on mental health and reinforce that mental health challenges are real, common, and treatable. I remain hopeful and moved by those efforts and recent state and federal investments to address and improve the mental health of our nation’s young people. As COVID-19 continues into its third year, the impact on children and young people’s mental health and well-being continues to weigh heavily. The impact that these challenges are having on their mental health—their emotional, psychological, and social well-being—is devastating. We have outlined seven recommendations aligned around social justice that policy makers, practitioners and clinicians are invited to adopt to advance efforts to intervene on modifiable social determinants that place populations in peril of https://www.naadac.org/cultural-humility-resources poor mental health.
In fact, parental incarceration leads to increased drug and alcohol use among children, affecting subsequent generations and the entire community (47–49). Considering the indirect health consequences of incarceration, having an incarcerated family member also harms the mental and physical health of nonincarcerated female partners and children. For white women, the risk of having an incarcerated family member is only one quarter as high, at 12%, as opposed to nearly 50% (46, 47).
Together, we can break down barriers, affirm dignity, and build a more inclusive path to mental health for all. Understanding how these factors interact helps us provide more responsive, compassionate support and recognize the full context of what BIPOC individuals and families are navigating. Many face intense pressure to uphold family honor, leading to shame and secrecy around mental health issues.
According to a recent survey of patients with psychiatric conditions, 61% of those not receiving mental health care listed cost as a barrier (52, 67). Persons with SMD often have limited access to general health care and are more likely to be poor and at risk for homelessness (59). Increasing community access to outpatient psychiatric services after incarceration should also be the cornerstone of any mental health reform. For the inmates themselves, the correctional facilities have become a front line for mental health care.
Acute curative care is provided in response to an immediate mental health crisis, such as a severe episode of suicidality or psychosis. Curative care focuses on addressing the mental health problem itself with the goal of alleviating symptoms and restoring the individual to a state where their mental health is stable and symptoms are absent or manageable. These efforts are essential in helping individuals manage ongoing mental health challenges and improve their quality of life.