“Potential harm from universal school-based mental health interventions: Candidate mechanisms and future directions” is it this title you searched? This is not an opinion piece, a review. There is also reference to several other reviews in the paper.
I think we’re on the same page that more need to be done to help children and young people. However, we can’t just give things a go and hope they help, especially when the evidence indicates it’s not only not helpful, but potentially harmful. It’s the same reason we can’t just randomly offer children new types of therapy that haven’t been studied, offer medication with no evidence base etc. You could easily say “well, increasing funding isn’t happening anytime soon, so let’s roll out hypnotherapy”.
As I quoted from the review (which you ignored) “The specifics of negative effects vary widely across trials. Negative effects have been reported across a range of self-report measures including a worsening of symptoms of anxiety, depression, hyperactivity/inattention difficulties, obsessive compulsive disorder and panic, and a decrease in parental relationship quality, prosocial behaviour and wellbeing”. They then reference the studies which found this, highlighting that the paper is a review, not an opinion piece.
The MHST has been in place since 2018, as can be seen on the NHS website. These are not new programs (“Since 2018/19, the NHS has been implementing new mental health support teams (MHSTs) in schools and colleges across England). I don’t believe I am uninformed, given I’ve worked in CAMHs and have a good knowledge of the conflicting evidence base. I think calling someone uniformed because they disagree with you is silly, personally.