The Five Federal Laws And The Human Service Movement 176816

The Five Federal Laws And The Human Service Movement

Discuss the intent of each of these five laws that are presented: 1. The establishment of the National Institute of Mental Health. 2. The Mental Health Study Act. 3. The Community Mental Health Centers Act. 4. The Economic Opportunity Act. 5. The Schneuer Sub-professional Career Act (1966). Additionally, describe the role of the National Organization for Human Service Education and the Council for Standards in Human Service Education in their application.

Paper For Above instruction

The development of human services in the United States has been significantly shaped by various federal laws aimed at addressing mental health, social welfare, and community development. These laws reflect an evolving understanding of social issues and demonstrate the government's commitment to fostering mental well-being, accessible mental health services, and professional standards in human services. This paper discusses the intent behind five key federal laws and explains the role of prominent organizations in shaping the human service education landscape.

1. The Establishment of the National Institute of Mental Health

The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), established in 1949, was created with the primary intent of advancing research on mental illnesses, understanding their biological and psychosocial foundations, and improving treatment methods. The founding of NIMH marked a pivotal shift from merely providing mental health services to systematically investigating the causes of mental disorders and developing evidence-based interventions. Its mission is to reduce the burden of mental illness through research, prevention, and treatment advancements, ultimately fostering a healthier society (Insel, 2014). The establishment of NIMH underscored a commitment to integrating scientific research into mental health policy and practice, serving as a cornerstone for mental health initiatives in human services.

2. The Mental Health Study Act

Enacted in 1955, the Mental Health Study Act aimed to evaluate the state of mental health services across the country and formulate long-term strategies for mental health care. Its primary intent was to identify gaps in existing services, assess mental health needs, and recommend policies for improvement. The act authorized a comprehensive national assessment that would guide federal and state governments in planning and funding mental health initiatives. This act represented an acknowledgment of the pervasive impact of mental health issues and a proactive effort to seek evidence-based solutions to improve mental health care infrastructure (Lamb & Weinberger, 2005).

3. The Community Mental Health Centers Act

Passed in 1963, this act was designed to shift mental health care from institutional settings to community-based services. Its main goal was to establish community mental health centers that would provide comprehensive mental health services, including prevention, outpatient treatment, crisis intervention, and rehabilitation. The intent was to make mental health care more accessible, reduce reliance on large psychiatric hospitals, and promote deinstitutionalization. The act also aimed to emphasize the integration of mental health services into local communities, thereby improving outcomes and ensuring that individuals with mental health issues received timely and appropriate care in familiar settings (Mechanic, 2000). This legislation fundamentally transformed mental health policy by prioritizing community-based approaches.

4. The Economic Opportunity Act

Enacted in 1964 as part of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s War on Poverty, the Economic Opportunity Act aimed to combat poverty and inequality through comprehensive social programs and community development initiatives. Its intent was to provide employment, education, health, and housing opportunities for impoverished populations. This law also established programs like Head Start and Neighborhood Youth Corps that targeted vulnerable children and youth to improve their social and economic prospects. It recognized that improving human services was essential for breaking the cycle of poverty and promoting social mobility (Bracey & Glick, 2010). The act marked a holistic approach to social welfare by integrating economic and social interventions to foster community development and individual well-being.

5. The Schneuer Sub-professional Career Act (1966)

The Schneuer Sub-professional Career Act aimed to create pathways for training and certifying paraprofessionals—individuals who assist professionals in human service fields. Its intent was to expand the workforce capable of delivering basic mental health and social services, especially in underserved and rural areas. By establishing standardized training programs, the act sought to improve service quality and accessibility while addressing the shortage of highly trained specialists. Recognizing that human service delivery is multifaceted and requires a broad workforce, this legislation laid the foundation for developing paraprofessional careers that support mental health, social work, and community services (Wolfe & DeVore, 1982). It contributed immensely to professionalizing and diversifying the human service workforce.

Role of the National Organization for Human Service Education and the Council for Standards in Human Service Education

The National Organization for Human Service Education (NOHSE) and the Council for Standards in Human Service Education (CSHSE) play pivotal roles in shaping human service education and ensuring quality standards. NOHSE advocates for the professional development of human service educators and promotes curriculum standards that prepare practitioners for effective service delivery. Simultaneously, CSHSE establishes accreditation standards for human service degree programs, ensuring that educational institutions meet rigorous criteria to produce competent professionals. These organizations collaborate to define ethical standards, core competencies, and professional practices that underpin human service education and practice. Their collective efforts enhance the credibility, consistency, and professionalism of the workforce, aligning educational outcomes with societal needs and policy directives (Turner & Cummings, 1994).

Conclusion

Overall, these five federal laws represent a comprehensive approach to addressing mental health, social welfare, and community development issues in the United States. They reflect an evolving understanding of human needs, emphasizing research, community-based care, economic support, workforce development, and professional standards. The roles of organizations such as NOHSE and CSHSE further strengthen this framework by ensuring that human service professionals are well-trained, competent, and guided by ethical standards. Together, these legislative and organizational efforts continue to shape the landscape of human services, aiming to enhance individual well-being and social cohesion.

References

  • Insel, T. R. (2014). The NIMH Research Domain Criteria (RDoC): Bringing science into the clinic. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 15(7), 433-440.
  • Lamb, H. R., & Weinberger, L. E. (2005). Trends in mental health services: Evolution and prospects. The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 32(3), 245-259.
  • Mechanic, D. (2000). Mental health services research and the challenge of deinstitutionalization. The Milbank Quarterly, 78(4), 607-632.
  • Bracey, G. W., & Glick, P. (2010). The War on Poverty and social policy: A critical appraisal. Social Policy & Society, 9(1), 23-36.
  • Wolfe, B. L., & DeVore, P. (1982). Paraprofessional roles in human services: Development and evaluation. Human Services in the 1980s, 29(4), 432-445.
  • Turner, F., & Cummings, M. (1994). Standards in human service education: A review of the role of accreditation organizations. Journal of Human Services, 20(2), 52-59.

Related Assignments