Schools can give children the tools they need
My citation should clarify my views on whether it is beneficial to offer mental health days to students.
These mental health days can have detrimental consequences, such as chronic absenteeism, without being able to identify and address the root of a student’s mental health problems. Lack of access to essential programs and professionals offered by
Baldwin has increased the number of trained counselors, secured over $4 million in funding for wellness centers, launched mindfulness courses in high schools, integrated mindfulness in middle schools, and completed a year in elementary school. developed a curriculum for Each includes well-deserved resources for faculty and staff.
The goal is to provide students with the tools to manage moments of crisis and future moments while allowing professionals to identify problems and provide the support they need.
Determining the cause of the problem is important. If a test or assignment causes student distress, teachers can devise solutions.
Conflicts at home and interactions on social media can lead to depression and anxiety. School social workers, psychologists, and guidance counselors can work with students and families.
Seamless access to mental wellness programs and trained mental health professionals in supportive and supportive communities, not mental health days, is an effective and correct solution.
— Shari Kamhi, Melville
The author is the superintendent of the Baldwin Union Free School District.
If readers believe the surge in children’s mental health problems has something to do with parents who “spoil” their children and “little Jimmy is sick”, who would benefit most from mental health counseling? maybe a parent. [“Mental health days? Flaw in the schools,” Letters, Jan. 4].
I somehow suspect that most suicidal tendencies are the product of weakness, immaturity, or something other than severe stressors, bullying, or general feelings of hopelessness.
— Wendy G. Schack, East Williston
Becoming a therapist is very difficult.
My daughter completed a 5 year college program to become a licensed social worker [“Here’s why teens can’t find therapists,” Letters, Jan. 4]She is currently in the process of working three years (3,000 hours) under the supervision of an Oceanside Private Practitioner.
My daughter only gets $27 per session with no benefits. This is insane. Once she passes the certification exam, she can earn $85 per session if she’s approved by insurance. She spends almost as much time documenting and fighting insurance companies as she does meeting with her clients.
She loves her job and often works 9-9, seeing 10-13 patients a day. She has a page full of requests from her referrals. she has to deal with this. No wonder she doesn’t have enough therapists. she is ridiculous
— Colleen Moraghan, Cold Spring Harbor
‘Leaders’ shouldn’t give Santos a pass
I appreciate William F.B. O’Reilly’s comments and agree that Republicans should not give Rep. George Santos a “fourth” for his mistreatment of lies. [“Santos deserves no quarter from GOP,” Opinion, Jan. 3]However, he chose to do so by giving him a pass, purportedly the future leader of the House Republican Party, for the sole purpose of winning Santos’ vote to fulfill that leadership role. exempted.
Doesn’t that say more of such a leader if he stands up and condemns such blatant dishonesty, regardless of how it affects his political future? If he does, people with integrity who have glimpses of Kevin McCarthy’s leadership abilities may change their minds and vote for him.
— Ruth Crystal, Baldwin
William FB O’Reilly’s words miss the point. He argues that Congressman-elect George Santos is “living proof that one candidate’s misconduct can hurt the entire party.” Is it really the case that the previous president said more than 30,000 lies and misconceptions in his four years and did not appear to have caused the ire of fellow Republicans?Republican morality for Santos Why adjust the law?It is not good to praise one liar and subject another to self-righteous ridicule. Santos doesn’t think the Republican Party has amassed enough Republican votes to cover him.
— Bob Basseri, Seaford
William FB O’Reilly correctly wrote that Congressman-elected George Santos “doesn’t deserve a quarter” from the Republican Party. But deep in the column, he says: He gives no example of this leftist behavior. Just an unfair putdown. And please stop calling me “Rib”.
Libertarians like myself want to help those most in need. O’Reilly’s Republicans—traditionalists and Trump supporters—enjoy supporting Top Dog. Example: Trump’s greatest achievement was the drastic tax cuts for the rich.
— Robert D. Adams, Great Neck
Gen-Zer cites poses for dangerous seating issues
At the December 29 Mineola rally protesting the seating of George Santos, I spoke about the impact of lack of integrity in government on America’s prosperity. [“Protesters: Santos must resign House,” News, Dec. 30]But as a member of Gen Z (ages 11-26) and still in the process of political socialization, I fear this story will have even more damaging consequences.
In reality, such brazen corruption undermines public confidence in elected officials. Such cynicism and negativity are dangerous. In 2016, former President Donald Trump used a disgruntled American public to install a government to oversee polarization.
As a nation, we should try to rid our political culture of this toxicity. The way to achieve this is to restore public confidence in government institutions. Allowing Santos to take office is a step in the wrong direction. Only ethical investigation and full accountability can help restore public trust.
— Greg Leon, Great Neck
We invite you to participate in our daily conversations. If you have any comments about today’s issue, please email us at [email protected]. Submissions must be 200 words or less. Please provide your name, hometown, phone number, and any relevant expertise or affiliation. Include the headline and date of the article you are replying to. Letters become the property of Newsday and are edited for all media. Because of the volume, the reader is limited to one letter he sends every 45 days. Published letters reflect the proportions received on each topic.
