HIGH-SCHOOL

Taylor: Anticipating mental health woes from lockdown

Troy Taylor
ttaylor@starcourier.com
Troy E. Taylor

Remove a boat’s anchor and it begins to drift. How far depends on wind, current, and maybe the most important factor, time.

Remove a student from the classroom and the athletics fields, and the result is much the same.

On Tuesday, the Star Courier reported that a significant number of student-athletes of high school age (first in Wisconsin, then nationally) have told researchers their mental health has declined during the lockdown for the novel coronavirus.

Many students, in answering questions in the survey being conducted by the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s Tim McGuine, are saying they have experienced a decline in their quality of life. More alarming, they are reporting feelings of anxiety and depression.

While the data has not yet been finalized, the depression figures are higher than expected, McGuine said.

Drawing conclusions at this stage is a bit presumptive. But comparing the results to data sets from earlier years — including the 2008-09 economic downturn — the loss of in-person classroom instruction and the prohibition on sports participation are the big variables that are different this time around.

It’s just speculation on McGuine’s part, but he says that because students stayed in school during the recession, it provided a counterpoint to all the other difficulties they faced. The students still had class, they still had sports, and that provided something they could hold onto in an otherwise tense and stressful situation.

If true, it builds a case for having school — and sports — this fall should pandemic conditions ease.

McGuine’s assessment is in line with a report published by The Lancet’s journal on Child and Adolescent Health in April. That article addressed the impact of school closures during pandemics, relying on available studies.

“School routines are important coping mechanisms for young people with mental health issues,” the article says in its introductory paragraph. “When schools are closed, they lose an anchor in life and their symptoms could relapse.”

The state has a five-phase plan called Restore Illinois, which sets conditions that must occur before a region moves to the next phase. The whole state is in Phase 3.

Schools K-12 don’t reopen in a region until the needle moves to Phase 4. And the good news on that score? The needles are in the green in the four regions.

But simply opening schools isn’t a fix in itself. When it comes to restoring the mental health of students, the road ahead is long.

The Lancet’s reporting on research about lockdowns in Hong Kong are certainly eye opening. Zanonai Chiu, a registered clinical psychologist observed this about children confronting depression: “Now that schools are closed, some lock themselves up inside their rooms for weeks, refusing to take showers, eat, or leave their beds.”

Chiu estimates that for children with depression, there will be difficulties adjusting to normalcy when school resumes.

The hard decision in all this, however, is the inherent risk of restarting society, including schools, without knowing much about the virus and with no cure on the horizon.

There are clinical ways to have this discussion, to couch it in terms that are sensitive, but it boils down to this: What are we willing to risk? What cost in terms of infection is acceptable? Do the gains offset the loss?

And if it feels like there is a drumbeat to open, it’s because society frays under conditions like the lockdown.

In a separate Lancet article from May 1, data collected during the SARS outbreak in China and the Ebola outbreaks in west Africa showed that prolonged school closures and social distancing/social isolation measures account for increased domestic violence, child abuse, neglect and exploitation.

Some have argued already that school closures didn’t significantly change the landscape of disease transmission, not when compared to the other problems.

Robert Dingwall, professor of sociology at Nottingham Trent University, said: "This is an important study that confirms what many of us suspected, namely that the public health benefits of school closures were not proportionate to the social and economic costs imposed on children and their families.”

Samantha Brooks of Kings College London and a member of the UK’s emergency preparedness unit seems to concur. "The finding that school closures have at best only a small impact on the spread of Covid-19 is of great significance, especially linked with the sensible suggestions for how a gradual return to normal schooling could be implemented."

The Lancet doesn’t go so far. School closures might have been what kept some areas for experiencing the tipping point — enough people self-quarantined that emergency services weren’t overwhelmed, which was the big concern initially. There is also concern about the “second wave” that takes place in a pandemics; when the doors re-open, there will likely be another round of cases.

“These findings pose a dilemma for policy makers seeking measures to protect populations,” the Lancet writes. “School closure presents an apparently common-sense method of dramatically reducing spread of disease and the evidence from previous influenza outbreaks appears compelling. However, policy makers need to be aware of the equivocal evidence when proposing or implementing national or regional school closures for Covid-19, given the very high costs of lengthy school closures during pandemics.”

Just remember: A lot of student-athletes have already drifted away from their emotional and social anchors. It falls on all of us to be prepared to assist in that recovery.