New Report: Are All Youth Mental Health Treatment Centers Bad?

A radical activist movement seeks to divest from critical youth mental health treatment

NEW YORK, NY – As America grapples with an unprecedented youth mental health crisis, a controversial movement to restrict residential mental health and psychiatric treatment facilities has gained momentum. Fueled by celebrity voices and emotionally charged media narratives, activists have portrayed all residential treatment as inherently abusive, prompting efforts to cut federal funding and impose restrictive regulations that threaten access to these vital services.

In a new report, Manhattan Institute investigative reporter Christina Buttons warns that while reform efforts focused on transparency are valuable, eliminating access to residential treatment will lead to more harm, not less. The number of residential treatment programs has decreased by 61% since 2010, with the number of children served in these programs falling by 77.9%. Contrary to activists' claims, the decline is driven not by reduced demand or ineffectiveness. Rather, essential mental health care options have shrunk due to growing ideological opposition, regulatory pressures, and subsequent legislative changes.

Buttons refutes key misconceptions, including the notion that abuse is systemic or that community-based care can universally replace residential treatment. Modern residential programs are regulated, evidence-based, and crucial for youth with acute, medically necessary needs who cannot be safely supported at home.

To preserve and improve these critical services, Buttons proposes the following policy recommendations: 

• Revise the Family First Prevention Services Act (FFPSA) to improve access to funding for residential care. 
• Repeal the Medicaid IMD Exclusion to simplify reimbursement processes and encourage capacity expansion. 
• Invest in tools and transparency to help families find safe, high-quality residential programs. 
• Pursue safety and accountability reforms without cutting off access to necessary care. 
• Incorporate diverse perspectives in policymaking, including the voices of families and individuals who have benefited from residential care. 

Click here to read the full report.