A 2024 report on Forbes.com stated that one of the challenges that college mental health will likely face in 2025 is the impact of divisive political conflicts within our nation. An example of this challenge is the recent tendency of state legislators to pass diversity, equity, and inclusion bans. As reported by Inside Higher Ed, during the first month of 2025, federal executive orders on DEI bans have sent a chilling effect throughout higher education. In response to this challenge, associations such as the Association for University and College Counseling Center Directors (which I serve as an executive board member) have argued that laws related to DEI bans should include language stating that these bans do not impact clinical services provided by license health care providers on campus. Some states, including Alabama and Iowa, have already included health care exemptions in their states’ DEI bans. Representatives in other states, such as in Texas, have voiced plans to argue for health care exemptions in established DEI bans. However, not all states have done so. As such, it’s important to highlight the likely impact that DEI bans will have on health care providers in states without these exemptions.
DEI Bans On Differential And Exclusive Medical Treatments
Many DEI bans include board language prohibiting any office from providing differential and/or exclusive treatment to students. However, the way politicians use the phrase differential or exclusive treatment is vastly different from how the medical community uses these terms. While politicians are concerned with offices giving preferences to certain students based on gender, race, ethnicity, etc., the medical community is concerned with the practicability of implementing effective clinical treatment. For example, many college students struggle with concerns related to sexual preoccupations, such as pornography use, excessive masturbation, and promiscuity. When counseling centers conduct treatment groups for such concerns (and there’s evidence that therapy groups are more effective than individual counseling for such concerns), these centers need to exclude female students from attending the treatment group for male students, and vice versus. The reason for this is obvious, but this reason is not considered in DEI bans that don’t have health care exemptions.
DEI Bans On Preventive Health Care Treatments to Targeted Groups
Many DEI bans prohibit providing services that target certain groups, such as members of a specific ethnic group. However, in today’s socio-political climate, it’s not uncommon for events to occur that uniquely affect a specific ethnic group. For example, though many college students were affected by the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks on Israel, the impact on Jewish college students was undoubtedly unique. Many counseling centers felt the need to have targeted preventive services to this group; due to instrumental concerns from Jewish students about loved ones who might have been victims of the attacks, emotional concerns related to anxiety and personal safety on campus, and the ability for these students to focus on academics. Such concerns were validated by government offices. On March 27, 2024, the governor of Texas released an executive order which voiced support specifically against “…antisemitism and the harassment of Jewish students.” Furthermore, health care providers can provide targeted clinical services in the aftermath of these events that are known to reduce long-term consequences, such as acute trauma response protocols. However, without a health care exemption in DEI bans, many counseling centers won’t promote/provide these services to specific groups for fear of violating state law.
DEI Bans On Health Related Outreaches To High-Risk Groups
Individuals with diverse identities tend to have higher risks for a variety of mental health concerns and have traditionally underutilized health care services. A 2019 study in the Journal of Psychotherapy Integration explored this trend for Black Americans. Regardless of the political perception of DEI offices, it was undisputed that DEI offices served as a gatekeeper for counseling services, meaning these offices were able to convince many students with diverse identities and high mental health needs to access counseling services. In states with DEI bans, these campus gatekeepers for diverse students are now gone. In addition, because the most effective outreach programs to encourage students of diversity to utilize mental health services often include specific cultural messaging, without health care exemptions, many health providers will not design outreach programs of their own. Thus, the void of reaching out to students known to be in many high-risk groups will remain on campuses.
Members of the medical community have urged politicians, university administrators, students, and media outlets to consider these limitations and acknowledge that these limitations do not fall within the stated intentions of DEI bans. As outlined in a 2024 report on Forbes.com, mental health has never been considered a partisan issue. Thus, there’s a need to clarify DEI bans to ensure that health services on campuses are not impacted.
