Surgeons, doctors, nurses and healthcare providers are rightly applauded as heroes for their life-saving interventions, medical expertise and ability to maintain health. Yet, there is an unsettling paradox that exists in our healthcare systems, the very professionals tasked with healing our minds -the Mental Health Specialists, Clinical Social Workers, Psychologists, Psychiatrists and counselors, those who heal our minds and prevent physical illness (Aarons et. al., 2008; American Psychological Association, 2024) earn a fraction of what their medical counterparts do. The profound disparity in salary not only devalues the essential work that mental health professionals do daily, it also perpetuates a system where the broken bone is treated with higher priority than a broken mind. The profound fact that the cost of a therapy session is a financial burden to millions, while a complex surgical procedure is readily covered. The wage gap between mental and physical healthcare professionals is not only a matter of appropriate compensation, it reflects societal priorities and a critical barrier to holistic individualized care.

Raising the Bar 
With a primary goal of holding insurance companies accountable for parity laws requiring equal pay for mental and physical health, MHIRTF intends to ensure access to ethical and sustainable mental health care through advocacy, education, innovation and legislation accountability. Chronic challenges such as parity violations, low and unjust reimbursement rates, carve-outs and vertical monopolies that limit access and create barriers, prior authorizations that delay provider payment, workforce burn out and high turnover rates motivate the members of MHIRTF to confront these systemic failures. 

The MHIRTF mission based on respect, transparency and collective care stands firm with the belief that mental health care systems should be designed by individuals they serve, not corporate interests. Overcoming these systemic failures requires fortitude and diligence, MHIRTF is laying the foundation for accountability at the highest levels focusing on systemic change by rebalancing macro-level power systems. This endeavor is not only about policy; it is about rebuilding trust and ensuring mental health care is as valued as physical health care. 

Support
    There are multiple supportive measures for the MHIRTF, whether you are a mental health provider, an individual who receives services, policymakers or concerned citizens. A simple first step is to sign and share their petition, which advocates for parity enforcement and accountability in fair reimbursement for providers. For direct support consider participating in or hosting a provider roundtable, joining a subcommittee focused on key areas like education or legislation. To help spread their mission consider inviting MHIRTF to speak at an event, sharing their efforts on social media, or connecting them with others who may consider assisting. Additionally, directly contributing to the mission by supporting future funding efforts or co-sponsoring events will assist in the continuation of this vital work. Every action, big or small, helps to build a more just and individual-centered healthcare system. 

For more information visit their website at https://www.buildbetterhealth.org/

References: 
Aarons, G. A., Monn, A. R., Leslie, L. K., Garland, A. F., Lugo, L., Hough, R. L., & Brown, S. A. (2008). Association between mental and physical health problems in high-risk adolescents: a longitudinal study. The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine, 43(3), 260–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2008.01.013

American Psychological Association (2024, October 21). Stress effects on the body Stress affects all systems of the body including the musculoskeletal, respiratory, cardiovascular, endocrine, gastrointestinal, nervous, and reproductive systems. Retrieved September 11, 2025, from https://www.apa.org/topics/stress/body

​

When I started this hybrid practicum in December 2025, I honestly had no idea what I was walking into. Coming from an inpatient psychiatric unit where I worked as a Mental Health Associate, the transition to an outpatient clinic as a student clinician felt like a huge leap. On top of that, I was doing this practicum in conjunction with KSCSW. What did that even mean? I had never been part of a clinical society before 
and had no real understanding of what advocacy looked like in practice. I was excited, but also incredibly nervous. 
Well, now that it’s September 2025, I can say that I’ve managed to survive so far; and honestly, that feels like a win in my book. This experience has been extremely eye-opening and I can positively say that it has given me more for my education than any traditional classroom assignment could have ever done. I of course attribute that to the amazing individuals that have made that possible. My amazing supervisor, Jenn Connor Godbey, learning from her is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity and I never allow myself to forget how lucky I am. There are also so many others within the outpatient clinic who have played a role in my growth as a future clinician. The list is honestly too long to include here but every single one of them has been amazing, and I’m deeply grateful. 
Starting this practicum in January turned out to be perfect timing because the Kentucky Social Work Lobby Day was just around the corner. Through my involvement with the Kentucky Society for Clinical Social Work and the support of my supervisor, I was encouraged to step out of my comfort zone and meet with state representatives. Even though I was nervous and unsure, I went for it—and I am so glad I did. I had the chance to speak directly with legislators, advocate for women's reproductive rights, and support policies that impact clinical social workers. It was such a powerful experience and truly one of the most meaningful moments of my career so far. 
As someone who always wanted to do micro work, the idea of macro work felt really intimidating. But take it from me—stepping out of your comfort zone is completely worth it. I truly do not think I could have had a better educational practice experience anywhere else. I am so glad I made the leap into advocacy and clinical work with KSCSW and UK Outpatient Psychiatry. This experience has helped shape me both personally and professionally, and I am so grateful for every moment.

​

​On Trump’s first day in office, he passed numerous executive orders.
-Ending Birthright Citizenship. This is a constitutional right guaranteed by the 14th Amendment.
-Leaving the World Health Organization
-Renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America
-Renaming Mount Denali to Mount McKinley. This was previously changed by Obama in 2015
-Reclassifying many federal employees, and initiating a federal return to office for all teleworking
federal employees.
-Terminating all federal offices and positions relating to diversity, equity, inclusion (DEI) and
environmental justice within the federal department.
-Recognizing only two genders. Transgender people will no longer be allowed to serve in the
military.
-Pausing the TikTok ban for 75 days
-Rescinding 78 of Biden’s executive actions, including actions combating racial and sexual
discrimination, and environmental protections.
-Declaring a National Border Emergency and several other executive orders involving stopping
any migrants into the country, even for refuge.
-Pardoning the insurrectionists from January 6, 2021.
-Withdrawing from the Paris Climate agreement
-Restoring the Death Penalty, emphasizing capital crime by undocumented migrants and
murder of law enforcement.
-Emergency price relief including lower the cost of housing and expand housing supply, but
includes eliminating climate policies that “increase the cost of food and fuel”

For a complete list of Executive Orders:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/01/20/trump-executive-orders-list/
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/20/tump-executive-orders-list

Other Executive Orders:
President Trump on January 21, 2025 issued an executive order that revoked and terminated many past acts that were focused on diversity, equality and inclusion (DEI). Trump has signed several Executive Orders in the past few days that directly attacked DEI programs in the federal government.

Included in this Order issued on 1/21/25 was Executive Order 12908 that was issued in 1994. This order was issued by President Bill Clinton. This Order stated that: “Its purpose is to focus federal attention on the environmental and human health effects of federal actions on minority and low-income populations with the goal of achieving environmental protection for all communities.”

Another was Executive Order 13583 issued by President Obama in 2011. This act sought to: “establish a coordinated Government-wide initiative to promote diversity and inclusion in the Federal workforce”  Trump also revoked the Presidential Memorandum of 2016, also issued by Obama. This Memorandum served to support his previous Executive Order 13583 and several others. Included in this Memorandum was support in efforts to avoid discrimination in the federal government including: gender, race, ethnicity, disability status, veterans, sexual orientation and gender identity, and other demographic categories.

Arguably the most notable and relevant revocation was the 1965 Executive Order 11246 which was later amended into the Equal Employment Act in 1972, passed by Lyndon B Johnson. This act was passed to ensure equal opportunity employment in the Federal government. This included “race, creed, color, or national origin”. This served to give equal opportunity to women and people of color. 

Within Trump’s Executive Order, he orders the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs within the Department of Labor to cease promoting diversity, hiring contractors to promote affirmative action, and “allowing or encouraging Federal contractors and subcontractors to engage in workforce balancing based on race, color, sex, sexual preference, religion, or national origin.”

This starts at the top with the federal government, but he continues by encouraging private sectors to follow in these footsteps and get rid of the promotion of diversity, equality and inclusion. 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/ending-illegal-discrimination-and-restoring-merit-based-opportunity/

https://www.archives.gov/files/federal-register/executive-orders/pdf/12908.pdf

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2011/08/18/executive-order-13583-establishing-coordinated-government-wide-initiativ

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/10/05/presidential-memorandum-promoting-diversity-and-inclusion-national

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/lbj-execorder/

​

America is faced with many persistent issues, many of which are due to the growing divide between our two leading parties. One issue that profoundly stands out is income inequality and poverty. Income is a major determinant of health and well-being. Some of the most significant aspects of an individual’s life are determined by income level or socioeconomic status. Income plays a significant role in education and employment opportunities, and most notably housing status. Outside of occupational disparities those with a lower income status are also subject to more health concerns, a trend that has worsened in recent years due to the COVID 19 pandemic. According to the National library of Public Medicine, data from Medicare revealed that older adults with a low income are more likely to be diagnosed and hospitalized with COVID 19.  
The COVID 19 pandemic was followed by more concerning trends past the pandemic’s initial stages. According to the National Library of Public Medicine, the wealthy fared well during the pandemic and by august of 2021, estimates suggest that the collective wealth of U.S billionaires increased by over a trillion dollars. Meanwhile, millions still live at or below the poverty line. Data from the U.S census bureau revealed that 37 million people lived in poverty, 15 million of which are children. Considering the impact income has on health and longevity, this is a concerning figure affecting predominantly marginalized communities. For decades, we have seen the effects wealth disparity has on health factors, yet this problem persists. The National Library of Public Medicine found that today 50% of household income goes to the top 10% of income earners in America, while only 13 % of household income goes to the bottom 50% of income earners. This dispairty also coincides with survival rate, as income determines the quality of housing, education, and healthcare. Without the ability to afford necessities, low-income individuals are subject to a more hazardous lifestyle meaning that health factors as well as crime and violence are more likely to occur for those affected by the wealth disparity.  
For long before the start of the COVID 19 pandemic, wealth inequality was a major problem that created more disparities for those affected. For decades we have seen the impacts this issue has on health and well-being. Like many Americans one can only hope our government intervenes and, at the very least, reduces the severe impacts that arise from wealth inequality.  ​

Since the beginning of the 21st century accessing mental health care has been needlessly difficult, particularly for marginalized communities. Many providers have limited what kind of insurance they will accept, putting people in need in a disadvantageous position forcing them to pay out of pocket for treatment. The COVID 19 pandemic further highlighted the various barriers to accessing mental health care and historically marginalized communities experienced the greatest barriers to accessing health care. According to a study conducted by the National Library of Public Medicine, the odds of having health insurance were 40 % lower for people with serious psychological distress than for those without. This is particularly concerning when considering the cost of treatment. According to a study by the American Center for Progress the average cost of a psychiatric diagnostic evaluation in Minnesota is $241 and the total cost for 12 sessions of psychotherapy is $1,920. Considering the broad scope of mental illnesses in contemporary society, psychotherapy providers could recommend more intensive treatment leading to a higher cost for clients in need who are paying out of pocket. This is where we see a clash between insurers and care providers. In some states, insurance companies have the authority to deem what is and what is not a medical necessity. The main problem that arises with this is that it limits the level of autonomy for those attempting to access mental health resources. The interference from insurance companies makes it difficult for care providers to ethically carry out their duties. The term “medical necessity” is also ambiguous and hard to define and clinicians who often deal with insurance companies believe that it is a way for insurance companies to undermine the client’s autonomy and access to treatment. For far too long insurance companies have made accessing necessary care needlessly difficult and it is apparent that having insurance companies active in the process only hinders the progress of those seeking care.  
References 
Director, S. Nadeau                    Associate, Nadeau, S., Director, A., President, J. Cusick                    Vice, Cusick, J., President, V., Director, M. Shepherd                    Senior, Shepherd, M., Director, S., Rapfogel, N., Altiraifi, A., Sozan, M., Correa-Buntley, T., Ombres, D., Ballard, D., & Bedekovics, G. (2020, March 23). The Behavioral Health Care Affordability Problem. Center for American Progress. https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-behavioral-health-care-affordability-problem/ 
Rowan, K., McAlpine, D. D., & Blewett, L. A. (2013). Access and cost barriers to mental health care, by insurance status, 1999-2010. Health affairs (Project Hope), 32(10), 1723–1730. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2013.0133 
 ​

Religion is often looked upon as an uplifting source of support and personal growth. Religion and spirituality can provide a sense of belonging for individuals, families and communities and provides a sense of meaning to those who practice. According to the Pew Research Center a majority of the world’s population reports being spiritual or belonging to a religious sect. Religion and spirituality is often seen as a source of resilience and coping, when individuals, families, and communities experience hardship it is customary practice across the world to turn to religion as a source of hope. There is still much debate over among experts and religious leaders regarding how exactly to define religion and spirituality, which makes defining religious trauma and religious trauma syndrome (RTS) difficult. Since this is a rather new phenomenon being discussed among respective fields of social science, the definition of religious trauma remains ambiguous. Initial research around religion and spirituality focused predominantly on coping and resilience among other mental health benefits. Recent research has gone in the other direction and has explored ways religion and religious groups may lead to and amplify health concerns.  
One of the definitions of religious abuse provided by the American Psychological Association is “mistreatment of a person who is in need of help, support, or greater spiritual empowerment, with the result of weakening, undermining, or decreasing that person’s empowerment.” This definition alludes to a person’s vulnerability and/or autonomy and brings attention to the needs of the people who indulge in religious or spiritual practice. Religious abuse also results from religious leaders taking advantage of their spiritual position by narcissistically reminding followers of their power, eventually leading to fear and paranoia among community members. The American Psychological Association presents several effects that religious trauma can have on victims including distorting the image of God or a higher power, creating barriers to setting healthy boundaries, as well as barriers to forming trusting and compassionate relationships in the future. The effects can also lead to hermeneutical injustice, which occurs when the victim’s harm results from a lack of knowledge which prevents them from acting in accordance with their own values. These effects can lead to severe cycles where, in many cases, victims suffer from cognitive dissonance and are unable to recognize, or simply refuse to acknowledge, the faults in their leaders and abusers.  
The recent discourse surrounding religious/spiritual abuse has brought attention to the aspect of cultural competence and cultural humility. Cultural competence relies more heavily on knowledge of distinct cultures, while cultural humility relies on knowledge but also emphasizes the need for critical self-reflection. Religious/spiritual trauma is not universal, not everyone suffers from abuse, and it is the duty of social workers to display humility when working with someone who has endured religious or spiritual abuse. According to the Industrial Psychiatry Journal, RTS was first termed by American Psychologist Marlene Winell. One area of study that has influenced has healthcare providers treat RTS is the amount of research on trauma or traumatology in the last 20 years. Research in traumatology has shown that people react differently, and this could be because of personal or any contextual factors. When victims who have experienced RTS are re-introduced to certain factors or triggers, their nervous systems can be mistakenly aroused and often the victim re-experiences the event. Dr. Marlene Winell outlined 3 stages of RTS which are as follows: 1) Pre-deconversion Trauma- harm done by religious beliefs and practices during the time a person is religious, 2) Deconversion- Acute period of leaving a religion, 3) post-deconversion adaptation- long-term mental health issues, delayed development, and cultural adjustment in the “world.” Treating RTS requires a holistic approach and an understanding of every aspect of the individual.  
 
 ​

In recent years, specifically from the presidential elections in 2016 to the midterm elections in 2022, there has been an increase in young voter participation in  
America. Young voter participation has been typically lower when compared to the rest of the general population in America. While there have been noticeable fluctuations in the 21st century, the most recent trend showed a nine percent increase from 39.4% of youth voter turnout in 2016 to 48% in the 2020 presidential election. The current trend is showing progress but there are still several structural and intentional barriers young voters must face each election in order to cast their ballot. The barrier that stands out most is the targeted efforts to disenfranchise and discourage young voters from engaging in the political process. Most of the efforts to disenfranchise young voters are consolidated in residency laws, which affect college students, specifically out-of-state students. Residency laws require students to either return home or, in some states, acquire a new driver's license and establish legal residency in a new state. This puts college students in a difficult position as they must choose between making arrangements to return home or going through the whole registration process in a new state.  
Young people face structural barriers to voting outside of the intentional barriers put in place by politicians. On average, young people often move far more often compared to the general population and this is not strictly indicative of young voters in college. Socioeconomic barriers limit the amount of employment opportunities that young people have. This leads to young people working jobs with less predictable schedules and their schedules can often affect their ability to even find the time to vote. Out of all eligible voters in America approximately 40 million of them are classified as Gen z voters. Those aged 18-29 years old constitute nearly 22% of the total American voting age population but in 2018 they made up only 13% of the electorate. The structural and intentional barriers restrict an enormous faction of our society from participating in the democratic process. The population of young voters are currently the most diverse generation of voters and while there has been an increase in young voter participation in recent years, there are still inconsistencies in how each state hinders or engages young voters in the political process. 
References  
Brill, L. (2024, January 19). A Silenced Generation: How the Power of the Youth Vote Collides With Barriers to Voting . Mapresearch.org. 
Tor, E. (2020, February 20). Why so many young people don’t vote – and how to change that. Frank Batten School of Leadership and Public Policy | University of Virginia. https://batten.virginia.edu/about/news/why-so-many-young-people-dont-vote-and-how-change 
Beadle, K., de Guzman, P., & Medina, A. (2022, March 17). The impact of voting laws on youth turnout and registration. Circle at Tufts. https://circle.tufts.edu/latest-research/impact-voting-laws-youth-turnout-and-registration 
 
 
  ​

As we move into the 2024 election season it is important to prepare for the aftermath of the election. Regardless of the outcome, there is potential for civil unrest. Action Link (a LGBTQ organization that focuses on policy and advocacy work) has developed a plan in the event of civil unrest. Plan ahead as we move into November and know that social workers are here to help advocate for those in need. 
Preparing for Potential Civil Unrest During an Election Cycle
Stay Informed

• Monitor the news. Follow reliable news sources to track developments.
  
• Sign up for local alerts. Utilize any community alert systems and emergency apps such as FEMA, CodeRED, or city-specific services.
  
• Monitor social media. It is helpful to follow local law enforcement and community organizations for real-time updates, but be cautious about the potential for misinformation to be spread.
  

Create Your Safety Plan

• Identify safe zones. Know where the locations are for police stations, hospitals, and LGBTQ+ community centers in your area.
  
• Plan evacuation routes.  Prepare multiple routes to leave your home or city if necessary.
  
• Stay home if possible. Avoid crowds, protests, and large gatherings where tensions may escalate.
  
• Create a family and friends communication plan. Agree on how you will contact each other in an emergency and where to meet if separated.
  

Stock Up on Essentials

• Food and water. Store at least 72 hours' worth of non-perishable food and one gallon of water per person in your household per day.
  
• First aid kit. Include basic medical supplies and any personal medications.
  
• Get cash. Have cash on hand in case ATMs or digital payment services are disrupted.
  
• Fuel up. Keep your car’s gas tank full.
  
• Supplies. In case of power outages, have flashlights, batteries, portable chargers, and radios ready to go.
  

Ensure Your Home is Secure

• Doors and windows. Ensure your home is locked and consider reinforcing entry points if tensions are high.
  
• Outdoor lighting. Use motion-activated lights to deter trespassers.
  
• Neighborhood coordination. Stay in touch with trusted neighbors to monitor unusual activity.
  
• Emergency equipment. Fire extinguishers, basic tools, gas shut off tool, and protective gear (masks, goggles, gloves).
  

Self-Defense Awareness

• Non-lethal options. Consider pepper spray or personal alarms for protection.
  
• Training. Take basic self-defense classes to feel more prepared.
  
• Avoid violence. Engage in de-escalation strategies whenever possible to reduce confrontation.
  

Mental and Emotional Preparedness

• Manage stress. Practice self-care and mindfulness to remain calm.
  
• Friends and family reassurance: Prepare children and other dependents with simple explanations and instructions to reduce anxiety.
  
• Support network. Maintain connections with family, friends, or mental health resources to help cope with uncertainty.
  

Engage with Your Community

• Local organizations: Know what local civil groups or community programs offer support during unrest. Find your local LGBTQ+ community center here.
  
• Help neighbors in need. When it is safe, check on elderly or vulnerable neighbors and offer help.
  

Legal Awareness

• Know your rights. Be informed about the laws related to curfews, protests, and emergency declarations.
  
• Document encounters. If you witness unrest, record interactions if safe to do so.
  

Contingency Planning for Employment or Travel

• Remote work. If possible, arrange to work remotely if your workplace is near volatile areas.
  
• Cancel unnecessary travel: Avoid travel if possible, especially to areas prone to unrest.
  
• Supply chain issues. Be aware of possible disruptions in deliveries or public services.
  

For more information visit: ​https://www.lgbtactionlink.org/

In November there are two amendments on the Kentucky Ballot. Here is a little information on those amendments: 

• Constitutional Amendment 1: this amendment is intended to add another measure that will prevent non-citizens in the state of Kentucky from voting in local, state, and federal elections. Here is what the actual amendment is in short: “No person who is not a citizen of the United States shall be allowed to vote in this state.” Here is how this amendment will appear on the ballot:  
  

• Are you in favor of amending Sections 145 and 155 of the Constitution of Kentucky to prohibit persons who are not citizens of the United States from being allowed to vote in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, as stated below? 
  

• Every citizen of the United States of the age of eighteen years who has resided in the state one year, and in the county six months, and the precinct in which he or she offers to vote sixty days next preceding the election, shall be a voter in said precinct and not elsewhere. No person who is not a citizen of the United States shall be allowed to vote in this state. The following persons also shall not have the right to vote: 
  

• Persons convicted in any court of competent jurisdiction of treason, or felony, or bribery in an election, or of such high misdemeanor as the General Assembly may declare shall operate as an exclusion from the right of suffrage, but persons hereby excluded may be restored to their civil rights by executive pardon. 
  

• Persons who, at the time of the election, are in confinement under the judgment of a court for some penal offense. 
  

• Idiots and insane persons. 
  

• In simple terms this is a completely unnecessary act that aims to ban something that is already illegal in all 50 states. This aims to add to a document that is needlessly long, and, in several sections, the language is outdated and does not reflect the state’s current values. The original version limited voting rights only to white males aged 21 and over and while this amendment does not aim to take us back in time it aims to needlessly add to an already long document. According to the courier journal studies have shown that it is extremely rare for non-citizens and undocumented immigrants to vote in local, state, and federal elections. According to the Boone County, Ky Republican party page, there have been no reported cases of non-citizens voting in Kentucky elections. Even supporters of this proposed amendment are aware of the absence of this issue, yet still it is being pushed to a vote. Those who oppose this proposal see it simply as a tactic to energize the republican base during an election year. This proposal really does nothing to improve the state’s constitution and is a pointless ploy aimed at dividing the citizens of Kentucky.  
  

• Constitutional amendment 2: this amendment is aimed at allocating public funds for private schools so that private schools can operate the same manner as public schools. This proposed amendment aims to provide equal education opportunities for all students and families across the state of Kentucky by using public funds to preserve private schools. Here is what the proposed amendment will look like on the voter’s ballot:  
  

• To give parents choices in educational opportunities for their children, are you in favor of enabling the General Assembly to provide financial support for the education costs of students in kindergarten through 12th grade who are outside the system of common (public) schools by amending the Constitution of Kentucky as stated below? 
  

• This proposed amendment is aimed to provide public funding for private schools. Public schools are already low on funding in many areas of the state, and this would further reduce the limited access to the necessary resources they desperately need. One example that stands out to me is the Jefferson County School system (JCPS). For several consecutive years in a row now, the busing system has been severely under-staffed and in the first few weeks of school this year some districts were unable to get their students home before 6:00 pm. JCPS is one of the largest school systems in the state and they would suffer severe consequences with the passing of this amendment. Much of the public funds for schools around the state are allocated to providing free meals for kids with lower SES. Reducing the funds available for public schools limits access to several necessary resources for kids who have a challenging time accessing them. Supporters of this bill want to emphasize equal education opportunities for all students, but allocating public funds, which public schools rely on for their own students, to private schools will only worsen the conditions of many struggling public school systems across the state.  
  

 
References 
 
Horsley, McKenna. (2024) Amendment 1: ‘Proactive’ or a ploy to stir up anti-immigrant vote? 
https://kentuckylantern.com/2024/10/10/amendment-1-proactive-or-ploy-to-stir-up- anti-immigrant-vote-boost-the-other-amendment/ 
Adams, M. G. (2024). 2024 constitutional amendments. An Official Website of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. https://www.sos.ky.gov/elections/Pages/2024-Constitutional-Amendments.aspx 
Collins, Emma. (2024). Kentucky’s Proposed Amendment 2: Bad for Taxpayers, Bad for Kentucky. https://www.kentuckylawjournal.org/blog/kentuckys-proposed-amendment-2-bad-for-students-bad-for-taxpayers-bad-for-kentucky 
Pinski, H. (2024, October 9). Kentucky ballot measures. Courier Journal. https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/09/13/kentucky-ballot-measures/74231405007/ 
Vanderhoff, M. (2024, September 16). Get the facts: New ad campaign urges Kentucky voters to approve Amendment 1. WLKY. https://www.wlky.com/article/ad-campaign-kentucky-voters-approve-amendment-1/62177936 
 
 
 ​

As we approach the upcoming 2024 presidential election the significance of voting cannot be understated. In recent elections, specifically from 2008 to 2020, voter participation has noticeably fluctuated. Presidential election turnout rates dropped about four percent between the 2008 and 2012 elections. There was a much larger fluctuation found in the mid-term election turnout from 36.7 percent in 2014 to 49.7 percent in 2018 following the controversial election of Donald Trump according to the Journal of Social Work education. The inconsistency in voter turnout rates among eligible voters is considered problematic among experts as a strong democracy is hindered by low participation of voters. Voting allows individuals, families, organizations, and communities to voice concern or disapproval for certain policies. Voting also allows vulnerable populations to a chance to engage in the political process and can be a powerful tool for change for marginalized communities.  
Scores of empirical evidence have linked voting and health. One study conducted by the National Library of Public Medicine (NLPM) sought to examine the relationship between differences in voter participation and the impact on public health. According to this study by the National Library of Public Medicine, four interrelated areas were discovered in association with voting. The first is that there is a consistency in the association between voting and health, the second is differences in voter participation are associated with health conditions, the third is gaps in voter participation may be associated with electoral outcomes and the fourth is interventions in healthcare organizations can increase voter participation. The results of this study revealed that voting and health are associated, but more importantly people with much worse health are less likely to engage in the political process. Health is, and has been, significantly impacted by social factors and processes, commonly known as the social determinants of health. According to the National Library of Public Medicine the social determinants of health are shaped by the distribution of power and resources. Voting also significantly impacts the distribution of power and resources as larger voter participation translates into greater influence over determining who holds political power and can enact change in a given community.   
As social workers we often find ourselves at the intersection of advocacy and empathy in our commitment to justice. Arguably more than any other profession, social workers experience firsthand societal inequities, systemic oppression, and often witness policies fail marginalized communities. The clients social workers serve often lack a strong political voice and the distribution of power and resources works against these communities. Those who hold political power tend to reward those who engage in the voting process by putting forward support policies that respond to the demands of their respective communities. Policies enacted by elected officials typically shape the social determinants of health. With that in mind voter participation has also been strongly associated with socioeconomic status as well. Research has shown that those in lower income communities and those with a lower level of education are associated with lower rates of voter participation during elections. This connection also pertains to people with physical, intellectual, and psychological disabilities revealing they too consistently have lower rates of voter participation. According to the study conducted by NLPM, results unveil that lower voting rates were associated with poor self-rated health measured by health risk behaviors, mortality, chronic health conditions, and hospitalization. The findings also reveal that voting is positively associated with self-rated health regardless of Socio-economic status.  
The discourse around voting for social workers has been a controversial topic. There are some in the field who accept prevailing myths about voter mobilization while on the job being partisan considering it unethical, with some even going as far as to say it is illegal according to the Journal of Social Work Education. On the contrary, voting is an extension of a Social Workers professional ethics and encouraging clients to register can be a powerful tool for change, especially for vulnerable populations. At the most basic level, Social Workers should lead by example, and by not engaging in the political process is unethical and not conducive to fostering change and empowerment.  
References 
Abramovitz, M., Sherraden, M., Hill, K., Smith, T. R., Lewis, B., & Mizrahi, T. (2019). Voting is Social Work: Voices From the National Social Work Voter Mobilization Campaign. Journal of Social Work Education, 55(4), 626–644. https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2019.1656690 
Brown CL, Raza D, Pinto AD. Voting, health and interventions in healthcare settings: a scoping review. Public Health Rev. 2020 Jul 1;41:16. doi: 10.1186/s40985-020-00133-6. PMID: 32626605; PMCID: PMC7329475. ​