The Binghamton University Counseling Center (UCC) recently announced a policy change that some reacted to with outrage. The switch to a brief therapy model is actually a wonderful thing, and I’ll explain why.
While the University’s student population explodes in size, the UCC is limited by the resources at its disposal. President Stenger’s “2020” plan seeks to increase student population even further (by nearly 25 percent) in the near future. Many students have alertly said the school infrastructure isn’t ready for that influx, and the UCC is a prime example.
All students deserve high-quality care and the ability to use the resources they pay for with their $95 health fee. One solution to this problem would be to increase the fee’s amount, but it’s been capped by SUNY.
There are currently 15 certified counselors and two graduate students on staff at the UCC, which — believe it or not — actually gives BU a relatively good ratio of counselors to students when compared to other schools of similar size. This policy is intended for use only on a case-by-case basis, when a student is stable but requires care for a very long period of time. The UCC has always maintained lists of local providers who are right near bus stops and accept insurance. The UCC has stated it’ll work with those students it refers to ensure their transition is smooth and that they can monetarily afford whatever provider they go to. This will allow more students to be seen at the UCC and to get help for issues they’re experiencing.
Those citing statistics on the prevalence of mental health issues among the college-student population are missing the point entirely. This change will ensure that instead of helping a chunk of the students who need it, they can hopefully accommodate every single one. Additionally, this type of solution to counseling-center crowding is one used by about half of college counseling centers nationwide.
I am not writing in defense of this University’s administration. Mental health services are key to academic success for many and a basic right. I find it very troubling that students are already being emotionally affected by this decision and expressing their anger on social media. The stigma surrounding mental health is a major blockage of help-seeking behavior, but access to care doesn’t need to be on that list as well. For a school that calls itself the “premier public” institution, they’re not doing enough to ensure their students’ health. The change at the UCC, however, is a wonderful one that has needed to happen for some time now.
The one solution I haven’t yet addressed involves the University simply allocating more money to necessary resources. Nothing should be considered more important than a student’s health and safety. Instead of expressing anger at the UCC, students need to communicate their frustrations to administration. I know this issue is important to President Stenger, mainly because I’ve had personal conversations with him about the importance of mental health. I believe with the right pressure applied, in the form of petition and speaking out, us students can realign our school’s priorities to reflect ours—and what they ought to be.
Ayal Goldberg is a senior majoring in psychology.