{shortcode-eff53d8c4eb206ebb3a546212d1d8765afd042d1}

In a timely development for the upcoming Bostonian winter, which will likely feature not only the city’s characteristic strong winds but also a high potential for seasonal affective disorder, Harvard’s Counseling and Mental Health Services department has launched a new slate of mental health resources. Among them is a telehealth therapy service called TimelyCare, which aims to provide students with “short-term, solution-focused therapy.” This expansion of campus therapy services, combined with a new mental health awareness campaign titled “We Are All Human,” is a welcome change as we grapple with midterms and prepare for the challenges of the upcoming season.

We had hoped Harvard would take action to address the mental health crisis on campus sooner, given the stark findings of a 2020 report of the Task Force on Managing Student Mental Health as well as years of advocacy by students, including this Editorial Board. In the absence of adequate administrative support — this past March, for example, appointments with CAMHS came with up to six weeks of wait time — many peer-led organizations on campus have been working tirelessly to provide mental health resources. We applaud these organizations for leading the conversations surrounding mental health on campus, and we hope that Harvard’s new resources, although coming later than we would prefer, can help ease the burden on our fellow students.

The privilege of having access to such resources during a global mental health crisis, as well as a national shortage of mental health service providers, is not lost on us. Mental health issues are not exclusive to Harvard; nor are they exclusively caused by Harvard. We recognize the privilege that comes with being able to claim greater access to therapy services in the midst of a widespread drought.

However, we hold some reservations about the new campus initiatives. The prescription of an online module as a means to improve the mental health of already-overworked students, who must juggle academic and external responsibilities in addition to maintaining their well-being, seems overly optimistic. More generally, Harvard should ensure that its mental health resource offerings are accessible and inclusive. The more barriers that can be removed with regard to mental health care, including long wait times and limited cultural sensitivity, the more useful these new resources will be for the student body.

Grappling with the scope of the mental health crisis on campus also requires us to look beyond current policies in place and toward more quotidian aspects of campus life. For instance, extending mealtime hours in dining halls may prove beneficial to students, as it will help students struggling with eating disorders to establish a comfortable mealtime routine and also promote greater nutritional intake among students more generally. However, heeding this suggestion will also require Harvard to consider the additional burdens it may place on HUDS workers and to compensate them accordingly.

House life, similarly, occupies a sizable place in the daily experiences of the average Harvard student; Houses function as both places of residence as well as sources of immediate community. Indeed, the existence of tutors with identity or experience-based roles — including BGLTQ, international, and religion/spirituality tutors — in the majority of Houses confirms the function of Houses as communities with people to whom students can turn for support. As Harvard expands its mental health offerings, it is worth considering the addition of resident therapists or mental health professionals within each House. Resident-centric programming, such as group therapy sessions and other collaborative mental health activities, could improve students’ access to mental health services on campus and further strengthen House communities.

Still, changing the culture surrounding mental health at Harvard requires us to look beyond dining dynamics and House life. Academic discourse at Harvard does not happen in a vacuum; the quality of the discussions we are able to have depends on our well-being, and in turn, the pedagogical and academic practices we engage in also impact our mental health. Therefore, Harvard’s faculty training should not only emphasize faculty competency in teaching but also faculty competency in treating students with compassion, especially students that may be experiencing mental health crises.

Above all, we know that the worsening of mental health writ large is not a Harvard-specific issue. No one policy — not telehealth, but also not magically getting everyone to do high-quality therapy — would immediately fix a mental health crisis of this severity and scope. Harvard’s recent initiatives are a welcome start; but at some point, barring a sudden reversal in rising depression rates, we must also have societal conversations about what exactly has triggered this broad, international malaise.

We hope that we can soon approach mental wellness as a normal and necessary aspect of living, much like annual physical health check-ups, and expand access to mental health services even for individuals who are not in immediate crisis or experiencing long-term disorders. As updates to CAMHS merge with years of student advocacy, we are also newly encouraged in our ability to approach this broad issue: Let’s use the resources at our disposal, and continue to talk about mental health with one another, doing what we can to change the culture surrounding mental health on campus so that our cumulative efforts make a real difference in the lives of all those who we hold dear.

This staff editorial solely represents the majority view of The Crimson Editorial Board. It is the product of discussions at regular Editorial Board meetings. In order to ensure the impartiality of our journalism, Crimson editors who choose to opine and vote at these meetings are not involved in the reporting of articles on similar topics.

Have a suggestion, question, or concern for The Crimson Editorial Board? Click here.