California Assembly Bill AB1767

California 2019-2020 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/22/19
• Refer: 3/28/19
• Report Pass: 3/28/19
• Refer: 4/1/19
• Report Pass: 4/22/19
• Refer: 4/23/19
• Report Pass: 4/25/19
• Refer: 4/25/19
• Refer: 5/8/19
• Report Pass: 5/16/19
• Engrossed: 5/23/19
• Refer: 5/24/19
• Refer: 6/6/19
• Report Pass: 6/26/19
• Refer: 6/26/19
• Refer: 7/8/19
• Report Pass: 8/30/19
• Enrolled: 9/9/19
• Chaptered: 10/9/19
• Passed: 10/9/19

Caption

Pupil suicide prevention policies.

Impact

If implemented, AB 1767 significantly alters existing protocols for suicide prevention by extending mandatory requirements down from grades 7-12 to include younger students. This reflects a growing recognition of mental health issues among younger demographics and emphasizes the need for comprehensive support systems. Additionally, the bill outlines coordination requirements with county mental health plans to facilitate necessary mental health referrals, indicating a shift towards more integrated health education in schools.

Summary

Assembly Bill 1767 focuses on enhancing pupil suicide prevention policies within California's educational framework. It mandates that local educational agencies (LEAs) serving pupils from kindergarten through grade 6 adopt specific suicide prevention policies. These policies are required to address the needs of high-risk groups, ensuring that all aspects are developmentally appropriate and sensitive to the unique challenges younger children might face. The bill's intent is to reduce suicide rates among children and to foster a safer learning environment through proactive policies and strategies.

Sentiment

The general sentiment surrounding AB 1767 appears to be supportive, as stakeholders acknowledge the necessity of addressing mental health at early stages in education. Advocates highlight the importance of young pupils having access to age-appropriate mental health resources, while some concerns may arise regarding the implementation and funding of such programs. The collaboration between educational and mental health services is viewed positively, suggesting a multifaceted approach to pupil well-being.

Contention

Despite broad support, notable points of contention include the financial implications for local educational agencies. Critics may express concerns about the potential strain on resources required for training teachers and implementing these new policies. Additionally, ensuring that the policies remain sensitive and appropriate for young children could lead to challenges in effectively delivering mental health education that meets the needs of varying pupil demographics.