PIPC Resources

Part IV: Recommendations How to Reduce Risks, Ensure Equity, and Protect Student Privacy when Implementing Self-Harm Monitoring Programs As schools and districts attempt to protect students amid the strains of the pandemic on student well-being, education stakeholders should remember that privacy protections can enhance mental health support programs by encouraging students to feel they can safely ask adults for help because they know that the information shared will remain confidential. Before adopting monitoring technology, schools and districts should understand key facts about how the technology works, how its implementation may impact students with mental health needs or disabilities, and how

Part III: Legal Considerations Legal Considerations for School Districts In addition to understanding privacy and equity impacts, schools should be aware of important legal implications associated with adopting monitoring technologies and collecting student information related to mental health and potential to self-harm. In addition to CIPA (described here), there are several federal laws and protections that may influence how school districts can implement self-harm monitoring programs, manage the student information collected through such programs, and interact with students identified through self-harm monitoring. Additional state laws may apply as well. Schools should be aware of federal and state regulations that may

Part II: Privacy and Equity Concerns 6. How is student information shared with third parties, if at all, and are such disclosures permitted by law? Another key privacy consideration is whether and how schools share student information collected from monitoring programs, including individual students’ flagged status, with third parties, such as law enforcement entities, hospitals, or social services providers. School districts may be inclined to share a student’s flagged status or mental health information with law enforcement because of biases and misconceptions that conflate mental health problems with violence, or even because of a lack of school-based mental health resources

Part II: Privacy and Equity Concerns 4. What harms, such as stigma or discrimination, may stem from sharing of students’ information or flagged status? Using self-harm monitoring systems raises potential risks of stigma or discrimination. Biases embedded in public perception and media lead to exaggerated fears that students experiencing mental health challenges are prone to violent acts,65 even though most people with mental health needs have no propensity for violence.66 As a result of such biases, school staff may treat flagged students differently from their peers or subject them to additional scrutiny. The common but false assumption that flagged students

Part II: Privacy and Equity Concerns Privacy and Equity Concerns Raised by Self-Harm Monitoring Technology Before adopting self-harm monitoring technology, schools and districts should understand the risks self-harm monitoring technology can pose to students’ privacy and safety and carefully weigh those risks against any benefits. Schools have widely and rapidly adopted self-harm monitoring technologies, despite the fact that they are relatively new and unstudied.49 Over the past two years, adoption increased as concerns grew about students struggling with mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic.50 These facts raise important questions about the privacy risks and implications of monitoring that schools must