What’s the goal here? Educators’ perspectives on Iowa’s Senate File 496 on school mental health systems

Iowa's Senate File 496 requires parent permission to formally survey students about their mental health, bans the discussion of gender identity and sexual orientation in schools before seventh grade, mandates schools obtain parental permission to use a nickname, and bans any books that depict or describe sex acts in schools. This instrumental case study examines how educators and school board members (n = 21) perceived the law’s influence on school-based mental health systems and the ways they believed it shaped student mental health. Key findings reveal educators perceived Senate File 496 dismantled essential mental health screening processes, restricted identity-affirming practices, and created ambiguity around emotional support. Participants describe these shifts as contributing to fragmented support systems, moral conflict among educators, and potential long-term harm to student well-being.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Education Policy Analysis Archives
Published
2025-10-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.33.8731
Primary Topic
Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

What’s the goal here? Educators’ perspectives on Iowa’s Senate File 496 on school mental health systems

Kathryn Watson
Education Policy Analysis Archives
Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
article

What’s the goal here? Educators’ perspectives on Iowa’s Senate File 496 on school mental health systems

Kathryn Watson
article en

Abstract

Iowa's Senate File 496 requires parent permission to formally survey students about their mental health, bans the discussion of gender identity and sexual orientation in schools before seventh grade, mandates schools obtain parental permission to use a nickname, and bans any books that depict or describe sex acts in schools. This instrumental case study examines how educators and school board members (n = 21) perceived the law’s influence on school-based mental health systems and the ways they believed it shaped student mental health. Key findings reveal educators perceived Senate File 496 dismantled essential mental health screening processes, restricted identity-affirming practices, and created ambiguity around emotional support. Participants describe these shifts as contributing to fragmented support systems, moral conflict among educators, and potential long-term harm to student well-being.

Education Policy Analysis ArchivesVol. 33
University of Iowa (US)
Institute of Education Sciences
Openalex Percentile: Top 59%
Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.