Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Counseling Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board discusses 'responsive mental‑health counseling' language; staff to add legal citations and clarify protocols
Summary
Board members and district staff discussed how the policy phrase “responsive mental‑health counseling services” should be understood in practice and asked staff and legal counsel to add statutory citations and written protocols.
Board members raised concerns about a phrase in the district’s school counseling policy that says school counselors shall “provide responsive mental health counseling services to students.” Members and staff sought to clarify the scope of that wording and how parental notification and consent are handled.
District counsel and staff told the board that the wording in the policy echoes state board language (F.A.C. 6A‑5.09) and that the phrase is not unique to Clay County. Counseling specialists explained that school counselors are certified educators (Florida teaching certificate) who provide short‑term, responsive supports in school — for example, crisis response, academic advisement and brief interventions — but are not a substitute for licensed community mental‑health treatment. Staff said licensed mental‑health services contracted by the district (for example, Clay Behavioral or other providers) require parental permission when applicable.
Eric Malone, a district school‑counseling specialist, described existing district procedures: counselors follow assessment and risk protocols for crises (including suicide risk), consult with district specialists for complex cases, document interventions in district systems and generally involve parents when a student’s issue rises beyond short‑term, school‑based support. Board members requested clearer language to ensure parents understand when the district will notify them and when additional, external services are appropriate.
The board directed staff to add citations to the relevant statutes (board members referenced statutes 1002.2 and 1014.04 for parental‑rights context) and to bring the issue forward as a policy agenda item. District counsel also agreed to draft a policy letter clarifying allowable activities for school booster clubs (fundraising, raffles and bingos) and the statutory time-in‑existence and filing conditions for raffles/bingos — a separate legal question that board members requested to help schools and community groups ahead of athletic seasons.
No changes to the counseling policy text were adopted at the meeting; staff will draft clarifying language and legal citations for board review.
