STOP Stigma: Students Together Overcoming Prejudice and Stigma

STOP Stigma Survey (student version) Class: ____________ Male Female Date: __________ This is an anonymous and confidential survey about what you know / think about Mental Health. It is being used at the beginning and end of a project you are going to do in school called ‘STOP Stigma’. The survey will help us evaluate the project. No-one will see your individual answers. We have only asked for class / gender information so that we can compare groups of results when we repeat the survey at the end of the project. Please read the statements below and tick one of the boxes labelled 1 to 5. Please answer as truthfully as possible. There are no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ answers and this is not a test.

1 st

ro ng

ly d

is a

g re

e

2 d

is a

g re

e

3 ne

ith er

a g

re e

no r

d is

a g

re e

4 a

g re

e

5 st

ro ng

ly a

g re

e

1 Anyone can have a mental health problem.

2 I would be too embarrassed to tell anyone that I had a mental health problem.

3 I would be happy to have someone with a mental health problem at my school or place of work.

4

Mental health problems are not real illnesses in the same way that physical illnesses are; people with mental health problems should just ‘pull themselves together’.

5 People with mental health problems are likely to be violent.

6 It's easy to spot someone with a mental health problem.

7 Once you have a mental health problem you have it for life.

8 Medication is the only treatment for mental health problems.

9 Someone with a mental health problem should have the same right to a job as anyone else.

10 I would not want to live next door to someone with a mental health problem.

STOP Stigma: Students Together Overcoming Prejudice and Stigma

1 st

ro ng

ly d

is a

g re

e

2 d

is a

g re

e

3 ne

ith er

a g

re e

no r

d is

a g

re e

4 a

g re

e

5 st

ro ng

ly a

g re

e

11 Anyone with a history of mental health problems should be excluded from public office (e.g. from being Prime Minister or in the Government).

12 As soon as a person shows signs of a mental health problem they should be put into hospital.

13 If I thought a friend had a mental health problem I would stay away from them.

14 It is important for a person with a mental health problem to be part of a supportive community that includes family and friends.

15 I have heard a person I know call someone names like ‘nutter’, ‘psycho’, ‘loony’.

16 If I thought a friend had a mental health problem I would want to help them.

17 If I thought that I had a mental health problem I would talk to someone.

18 People are born with mental health problems.

19 Using words like ‘nutter’, ‘psycho’, ‘loony’ is just a bit of fun. No-one gets hurt.

20 Mental health problems only affect adults, not children and young people.

21 If I thought that I had a mental health problem I would know how to get help.

22 Only certain kinds of people develop mental health problems.

23 It’s more important to spend National Health Service (NHS) money on treating physical conditions rather than mental health problems.

Op-Ed Rubric Prof. Hankinson Spring 2020 Components of a Successful Op-Ed

● Contains an “catchy” headline ○ I should have an idea of your position from the headline ○ Good example

■ “On Social Security, Tap the Wealthy to Support a Program for All” - ​"On Social Security, Tap the Wealthy to Support a Program for All"

○ Bad example ■ “How to Fix Housing Policy”

● Doesn’t tell me anything about the argument ● Establishes argument in the opening paragraph

○ Good example ■ “Social Security is in peril these days, not because of its finances, but

because politicians refuse to consider the most obvious, highly popular reform -- uncapping the payroll tax, which would essentially shore up its finances in perpetuity.” - ​"On Social Security, Tap the Wealthy to Support a Program for All"

● Describe the status quo ○ What is society like today, without the proposed policy? Why is the status quo

inadequate? ○ Good example

■ “After remaining essentially flat in the 1950s and 1960s, the prevalence of obesity doubled in adults and tripled in children between the 1970s and 2000. ​According to new data​ from the Centers for Disease Control, the epidemic shows no signs of abating. Nearly four out of 10 adults are obese; for children, it’s nearly two out of 10. Most 2-year-olds today will develop obesity by age 35, according to a ​recent projection​ from our colleagues at Harvard. The obesity epidemic affects every region of the country and every demographic group. But rates have increased the fastest among low-income Americans and racial minorities, exacerbating pre-existing health disparities.“ - ​"The Toll of America’s Obesity"

■ Directly addresses need for policy in this space using empirical evidence to highlight problem

● Uses ​one​ piece of social science evidence for the existence of the status quo ○ What are the politics that created this problem in the first place? ○ What are the politics that are preventing your solution from being implemented? ○ Examples of theories

■ E.g., Does the concentration/diffusion of costs and benefits limit policy action (J. Q. Wilson)?

■ E.g., Does your policy require collective action and face the problem of free-riding (Olson)?

■ E.g., Are people simply unaware of the status quo, or systematically misperceiving it?

○ Good examples ■ Misperceptions of elected officials

● “Congress doesn’t know what policies Americans support. We know that because we asked the most senior staff members in Congress — the people who help their bosses decide what bills to pursue and support — what they believed public opinion was in their district or state on a range of issues....As a similar study showed​, state politicians also do a poor job guessing public opinion of their constituents. We found two key factors that explain why members of Congress are so ignorant of public preferences: their staffs’ own beliefs and congressional offices’ relationships with interest groups.” ​"Congress Has No Clue What Americans Want"

● Cites a study showing that politicians are bad at guessing public opinion, such as systematically underestimating what share of their constituents support climate change legislation.

■ Loss aversion ● “Obviously, programs like these don’t eliminate the costs of

moving away from dirty energy. But they can change the political calculus. When a policy calls attention to the costs of the transition, as a carbon tax does, people are wary. When a policy calls attention to the benefits, people often have a more favorable attitude and are willing to accept slightly higher costs.” ​"Winning the climate fight"

● ^Uses social science psychology, but needs a citation. ○ Bad Example

■ “Republicans and Democrats are gridlocked and can’t agree to a fix...” ● Unsightful. Why are they at a gridlock? What are there

arguments/values that lead to disagreement? ■ “The ​X​ political party is in the pockets of Big ​Y...​”

● Show me evidence of why? Is there evidence of how extensive campaign donations to key decision makers?

● Propose a ​specific​ policy change ○ What is the policy or regulation?

■ “And this legislative session, a bipartisan coalition of California legislators is supporting the ​More Homes Act​, which is sponsored by one of us (Senator Wiener). ​The bill​ would override local restrictive zoning by legalizing small to midsize apartment buildings (up to five stories) near job

centers and public transportation and set minimum affordability standards for some of those units.” - ​"Why Housing Policy Is Climate Policy"

○ Who would it affect, in terms of beneficiaries? ■ “The legislation would also help existing renters keep their homes in

areas that qualify for new housing. The measures are intended to stem the growth of super-commuters — workers who are priced out of areas near their jobs and forced to drive long distances to get to work.” - ​"Why Housing Policy Is Climate Policy"

○ How much would it cost?/Who would it harm? ● Describe ​at least​ 2 pieces of policy evidence supporting your policy effects

○ What studies support the expected effects of your policy? ○ Who wrote the studies? ○ What are the specific findings of the studies? ○ Good example

■ “Moreover, liberal economists Emmanuel Saez and Jeffrey Liebman concluded​ that, because of income shifting and behavioral responses, net collections from eliminating the cap would be less than 60 percent of what static projections claim.” - ​"Don’t Raise or Eliminate the Contribution Cap"

■ “In 2018, researchers at ​the Education Trust​ found that in many states free college policies actually end up providing more resources to upper-middle-class students than more needy ones. ​A similar study​that zeroed in on Tennessee’s community college program showed that about half of qualifying students received no aid at all. Meanwhile, a student from a family earning over $160,000 annually could receive more than $1,400 in state subsidies.” - ​“The Cruel Irony of ‘Free’ College Promises”

● Include a qualifying paragraph (2-3 sentences) ○ What are the tradeoffs of your proposed policy?

■ Are there reasons the policy may fail or not fix everything wrong with the status quo?

■ Are there people who will “lose” from it? ■ Why should we tolerate that lost/cost?

○ Good example ■ “One objection does have merit: Though carbon pricing would spur huge

change in infrastructure and power generation, that alone would not be enough. It would not stimulate all the innovation the nation needs in the climate fight, nor would it change behaviors in circumstances where the desired price signal is muted or nonexistent. Carbon pricing can do a lot — but not everything...In those circumstances, the government would have to do more.” - ​"Want a Green New Deal? Here’s a better one"

● Closing Statement/Call to Action ○ What can X group do to help achieve this policy goal? ○ E.g., “In June, the Women in Public Service Project will convene at Wellesley

some 50 emerging women leaders from around the world, focusing on countries

in transition, to offer intensive training and a cross-cultural exchange of ideas and resources....I hope other institutions will join the movement towards leadership parity, because if you have female students, and if you believe that they will be integral in leading the world in the 21st century, then you too are a women’s college. And if we get this right, the world will be a better place—not just for women but for everyone.” ​“Why all colleges should think of themselves as women’s colleges”

Sources For public policy evidence, several trusted, nonpartisan think tanks include:

● Urban Institute - poverty and inequality related policy ● Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget - federal budget and fiscal issues ● Kaiser Family Foundation - health care and health policy ● Brookings Institution - general public policy

You are welcome to cite research outside of these groups, but strive to explain their background. For example, “The Center for American Progress, a liberal-leaning think tank, finds…” Or, “The Cato Institute, a Libertarian think tank,...” Ultimately, these categories can be fluid, but some organizations are extremely oriented towards specific policy agendas, threatening the objectivity of their policy briefs. Here is a list compiled by ​The New York Times ​that categorizes the most prominent think tanks: https://ideas.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/10/think-tanks/ Rough Draft A draft of your op-ed to be circulated blindly to a peer for review

● Due Wednesday, March 18th, 11:59 pm ● Not graded, but will be penalized if judged incomplete/incoherent

Peer Review A write-up in response to your peer’s op-ed.

● 400-500 words, ● Due Monday, April 6th, 11:59 pm ● Verify that each component of the op-ed is present ● Grade the op-ed as if you were a professor ● Your review will be graded on whether it addresses ​each​ of the defined components

○ State where the component is in the text ○ State whether the component meets your standard

Final Submission To achieve an A, your op-ed must meet each criteria

● Include ​all​ of the above components ● Length between 600 and 700 words

● 1” margins, double-spaced, submitted as a pdf ● Include a ‘Works Cited’ section formatted in the APA style

○ All facts must be supported in the text by their source ○ Formal in-text citations are not required, nor appropriate for an op-ed

● Include a pdf/screenshot of the email sent to the media outlet for publication ● Contain zero spelling or grammar errors ● Be submitted by Monday, April 27th, 11:59 pm

The author is advocating for the importance of adopting a public healthcare system in the

United States. The opening paragraph begins the discussion of the importance of public

healthcare in America, but is too vague. It doesn’t mention a policy, but rather the general

opinions of the author. The writing may be stronger if opinions such as “Most private healthcare

systems are less concerned with the health of the community...” were made later in the article,

directly next to evidence that supports this claim.The author writes “The government should thus

consider ​putting together…policies...” however such it is better to make a definitive statement,

so the word “consider” should be eliminated. The last sentence is unnecessary, as the purpose of

the Op-Ed is to prove a point, or justify the importance of a policy.

There are many compelling ideas introduced, but the article lacks sufficient evidence to

support these ideas. The author mentions the “vast number” of uninsured Americans, but gives

no concrete numbers or evidence to back this claim. Similarly, the author mentions “the rate [of

uninsured Americans] has decreased,” but gives no evidence of this decline. The author is

advocating for universal healthcare, so if this statement is true, it would refute their argument.

The author mentions Medicare and Medicaid, which are a part of the “status-quo” as they

have been a part of the American healthcare system for decades. Based on the writing, it can be

assumed that the author wants to model the public healthcare system off of these existing

policies, but this is never said. The author explains the importance of these systems well, but the

distinction between them could be made clearer. The author says that Medicaid “covers families

that have low incomes and individuals in society with disabilities” and that Medicare “...is a

federal government health insurance program that subsidizes the cost of healthcare.” However,

Medicaid provides insurance for ​low-income ​individuals, while Medicare provides assistance for

those who are ​65+​ and those ​under 65 with disabilities​. The author mentions a study by Guth,

Farfield, and Rudowitz and says that it “shows that the effects of Medicaid expansion in the

United States are positive.” However, the author never explains the study or what the positive

effects are.

The author then proceeds to explain part of the private healthcare industry. It is not

necessary to say that “ private healthcare systems do not make efforts to support public

healthcare...” as that is the nature of the relationship between the two. However, it would be

useful to expand on the information that the author then lays out concerning the “high

administrative costs” of private healthcare. This is good evidence, but could be made stronger by

comparing the costs of the U.S. healthcare versus countries that have a universal healthcare

system.

In the closing paragraph, the author says that “Creating public healthcare systems is a

way that the government can help revive the healthcare ​industry​...” The use of the word ​industry

seems to be a misuse, as public healthcare seeks to replace the current ​healthcare industry​. The

article closes with the author saying that the government “has to ensure constant monitoring” of

the public healthcare system, as it is the only way to “benefit from pros” of it. This should be

mentioned earlier in the article. The closing point should only reinforce the necessity of the

suggested policy.

Overall, the author has set up some strong arguments, but does not include evidence to

support these claims. The article does not give any specifics of how the public healthcare system

will be set up or how it will be funded. There is no substantial social science evidence given for

the claims the author makes. Lastly, the author does not pay sufficient attention to how this

system will differentiate from the private health care system, or the “status-quo.”