Health Policy

The large-scale layoffs in the federal government that began in January continue, as the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) announced the dismissal of > 1400 employees in “non-mission critical roles,” including those “related to DEI” (diversity, equity, inclusion) on Feb. 24. According to VA, those fired are bargaining-unit probationary employees who have served > 1 year in a competitive service appointment or who have served > 2 years in an excepted service appointment.

The agency says the “personnel moves” will save > $83 million annually, which will be redirected back toward health care, benefits and services for VA beneficiaries.

Of the nearly 40,000 probationary employees in the department, the majority were exempt, the VA says, because they serve in mission-critical positions—primarily those supporting benefits and services for VA beneficiaries, such as Veterans Crisis Line responders. VA employees who elected to participate in the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM) deferred resignation program are also exempt. As an “additional safeguard,” the VA says the first Senior Executive Service (SES) or SES-equivalent leader in a dismissed employee’s chain of command can request the employee be exempted from removal.

The latest cuts follow the dismissal of > 1000 employees announced Feb. 13. In that case, the VA expected to save > $98 million annually, also to be “redirected back” toward health care, benefits, and services. VA insists it continues to hire for mission-critical positions that are exempt from the federal hiring freeze.

Layoffs are also impacting other federal public health agencies. Although the White House has not released figures, a ProPublica investigation details the impact of the layoffs on organ transplant and maternal mortality programs. Other layoffs that have been reported include :

• About 750 workers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
• More than 1000 staffers at the National Institutes of Health
• “Dozens” at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
• “Scores” at the US Food and Drug Administration
• Downsizing at the VA EHR Modernization Integration Office

“By gutting essential health staff, hiding vital public health data, and silencing health experts, these actions have left every American family more vulnerable to deadly disease outbreaks, unsafe food and water, and preventable deaths,” the American Public Health Association said in a press release. “This is also not just an attack on federal institutions – it's a direct attack on every parent trying to protect their child from disease, every worker relying on public health safeguards and every family depending on rapid responses to outbreaks and emergencies.” American Public Health Association also announced that is suing the Department of Government Efficiency for violating federal transparency laws. “It is unfathomable that anybody thinks these cuts have value and are doing anything other than being performative.”

In 2024, the VA had planned to trim its 458,000-member workforce by about 2%, or 10,000 employees, through attrition (with most of the reduction coming from VHA). VHA Chief Financial Officer Laura Duke told reporters in March 2024 that the reduction was needed because the agency had far exceeded its hiring goals last year, and was also seeing higher-than-expected retention rates.

“These and other recent personnel decisions are extraordinarily difficult, but VA is focused on allocating its resources to help as many veterans, families, caregivers, and survivors as possible,” VA Secretary Doug Collins said. “These moves will not hurt VA health care, benefits or beneficiaries. In fact, veterans are going to notice a change for the better. In the coming weeks and months, VA will be announcing plans to put these resources to work helping the department fulfill its core mission: providing the best possible care and benefits to veterans, their families, caregivers and survivors.”

Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee Ranking Member Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and a group of 35 Democratic senators signed a letter earlier in February calling for Sec. Collins to immediately reinstate the terminated VA employees. “[W]e were outraged,” the letter said, “by the Administration’s abrupt and indiscriminate termination of tens of thousands of workers across almost every government agency, including more than 1000 Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) employees. We were further disturbed by the manner in which you publicly celebrated this reprehensible announcement—a clear departure from the assurances provided throughout your confirmation process to never ‘balance budgets on the back of veterans’ benefits’ and to always ‘put the veteran first.’”

Blumenthal also notes that the “continued mass terminations” come at a time when the VA faces critical staffing shortages and increased demand for its services. The senators detailed the effects the cuts were having, including how openings for new clinics were delayed because the VA cannot hire the necessary staff to open their doors; service lines at VA hospitals and clinics halted; beds and operating rooms at VA facilities suspended; support lines for caregivers reduced; Veterans Crisis Line employees fired; and suicide prevention training sessions postponed or canceled.

The large-scale layoffs in the federal government that began in January continue, as the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) announced the dismissal of > 1400 employees in “non-mission critical roles,” including those “related to DEI” (diversity, equity, inclusion) on Feb. 24. According to VA, those fired are bargaining-unit probationary employees who have served > 1 year in a competitive service appointment or who have served > 2 years in an excepted service appointment.

The agency says the “personnel moves” will save > $83 million annually, which will be redirected back toward health care, benefits and services for VA beneficiaries.

Of the nearly 40,000 probationary employees in the department, the majority were exempt, the VA says, because they serve in mission-critical positions—primarily those supporting benefits and services for VA beneficiaries, such as Veterans Crisis Line responders. VA employees who elected to participate in the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM) deferred resignation program are also exempt. As an “additional safeguard,” the VA says the first Senior Executive Service (SES) or SES-equivalent leader in a dismissed employee’s chain of command can request the employee be exempted from removal.

The latest cuts follow the dismissal of > 1000 employees announced Feb. 13. In that case, the VA expected to save > $98 million annually, also to be “redirected back” toward health care, benefits, and services. VA insists it continues to hire for mission-critical positions that are exempt from the federal hiring freeze.

Layoffs are also impacting other federal public health agencies. Although the White House has not released figures, a ProPublica investigation details the impact of the layoffs on organ transplant and maternal mortality programs. Other layoffs that have been reported include :

• About 750 workers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
• More than 1000 staffers at the National Institutes of Health
• “Dozens” at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
• “Scores” at the US Food and Drug Administration
• Downsizing at the VA EHR Modernization Integration Office

“By gutting essential health staff, hiding vital public health data, and silencing health experts, these actions have left every American family more vulnerable to deadly disease outbreaks, unsafe food and water, and preventable deaths,” the American Public Health Association said in a press release. “This is also not just an attack on federal institutions – it's a direct attack on every parent trying to protect their child from disease, every worker relying on public health safeguards and every family depending on rapid responses to outbreaks and emergencies.” American Public Health Association also announced that is suing the Department of Government Efficiency for violating federal transparency laws. “It is unfathomable that anybody thinks these cuts have value and are doing anything other than being performative.”

In 2024, the VA had planned to trim its 458,000-member workforce by about 2%, or 10,000 employees, through attrition (with most of the reduction coming from VHA). VHA Chief Financial Officer Laura Duke told reporters in March 2024 that the reduction was needed because the agency had far exceeded its hiring goals last year, and was also seeing higher-than-expected retention rates.

“These and other recent personnel decisions are extraordinarily difficult, but VA is focused on allocating its resources to help as many veterans, families, caregivers, and survivors as possible,” VA Secretary Doug Collins said. “These moves will not hurt VA health care, benefits or beneficiaries. In fact, veterans are going to notice a change for the better. In the coming weeks and months, VA will be announcing plans to put these resources to work helping the department fulfill its core mission: providing the best possible care and benefits to veterans, their families, caregivers and survivors.”

Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee Ranking Member Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and a group of 35 Democratic senators signed a letter earlier in February calling for Sec. Collins to immediately reinstate the terminated VA employees. “[W]e were outraged,” the letter said, “by the Administration’s abrupt and indiscriminate termination of tens of thousands of workers across almost every government agency, including more than 1000 Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) employees. We were further disturbed by the manner in which you publicly celebrated this reprehensible announcement—a clear departure from the assurances provided throughout your confirmation process to never ‘balance budgets on the back of veterans’ benefits’ and to always ‘put the veteran first.’”

Blumenthal also notes that the “continued mass terminations” come at a time when the VA faces critical staffing shortages and increased demand for its services. The senators detailed the effects the cuts were having, including how openings for new clinics were delayed because the VA cannot hire the necessary staff to open their doors; service lines at VA hospitals and clinics halted; beds and operating rooms at VA facilities suspended; support lines for caregivers reduced; Veterans Crisis Line employees fired; and suicide prevention training sessions postponed or canceled.

The large-scale layoffs in the federal government that began in January continue, as the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) announced the dismissal of > 1400 employees in “non-mission critical roles,” including those “related to DEI” (diversity, equity, inclusion) on Feb. 24. According to VA, those fired are bargaining-unit probationary employees who have served > 1 year in a competitive service appointment or who have served > 2 years in an excepted service appointment.

The agency says the “personnel moves” will save > $83 million annually, which will be redirected back toward health care, benefits and services for VA beneficiaries.

Of the nearly 40,000 probationary employees in the department, the majority were exempt, the VA says, because they serve in mission-critical positions—primarily those supporting benefits and services for VA beneficiaries, such as Veterans Crisis Line responders. VA employees who elected to participate in the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM) deferred resignation program are also exempt. As an “additional safeguard,” the VA says the first Senior Executive Service (SES) or SES-equivalent leader in a dismissed employee’s chain of command can request the employee be exempted from removal.

The latest cuts follow the dismissal of > 1000 employees announced Feb. 13. In that case, the VA expected to save > $98 million annually, also to be “redirected back” toward health care, benefits, and services. VA insists it continues to hire for mission-critical positions that are exempt from the federal hiring freeze.

Layoffs are also impacting other federal public health agencies. Although the White House has not released figures, a ProPublica investigation details the impact of the layoffs on organ transplant and maternal mortality programs. Other layoffs that have been reported include :

• About 750 workers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
• More than 1000 staffers at the National Institutes of Health
• “Dozens” at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
• “Scores” at the US Food and Drug Administration
• Downsizing at the VA EHR Modernization Integration Office

“By gutting essential health staff, hiding vital public health data, and silencing health experts, these actions have left every American family more vulnerable to deadly disease outbreaks, unsafe food and water, and preventable deaths,” the American Public Health Association said in a press release. “This is also not just an attack on federal institutions – it's a direct attack on every parent trying to protect their child from disease, every worker relying on public health safeguards and every family depending on rapid responses to outbreaks and emergencies.” American Public Health Association also announced that is suing the Department of Government Efficiency for violating federal transparency laws. “It is unfathomable that anybody thinks these cuts have value and are doing anything other than being performative.”

In 2024, the VA had planned to trim its 458,000-member workforce by about 2%, or 10,000 employees, through attrition (with most of the reduction coming from VHA). VHA Chief Financial Officer Laura Duke told reporters in March 2024 that the reduction was needed because the agency had far exceeded its hiring goals last year, and was also seeing higher-than-expected retention rates.

“These and other recent personnel decisions are extraordinarily difficult, but VA is focused on allocating its resources to help as many veterans, families, caregivers, and survivors as possible,” VA Secretary Doug Collins said. “These moves will not hurt VA health care, benefits or beneficiaries. In fact, veterans are going to notice a change for the better. In the coming weeks and months, VA will be announcing plans to put these resources to work helping the department fulfill its core mission: providing the best possible care and benefits to veterans, their families, caregivers and survivors.”

Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee Ranking Member Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and a group of 35 Democratic senators signed a letter earlier in February calling for Sec. Collins to immediately reinstate the terminated VA employees. “[W]e were outraged,” the letter said, “by the Administration’s abrupt and indiscriminate termination of tens of thousands of workers across almost every government agency, including more than 1000 Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) employees. We were further disturbed by the manner in which you publicly celebrated this reprehensible announcement—a clear departure from the assurances provided throughout your confirmation process to never ‘balance budgets on the back of veterans’ benefits’ and to always ‘put the veteran first.’”

Blumenthal also notes that the “continued mass terminations” come at a time when the VA faces critical staffing shortages and increased demand for its services. The senators detailed the effects the cuts were having, including how openings for new clinics were delayed because the VA cannot hire the necessary staff to open their doors; service lines at VA hospitals and clinics halted; beds and operating rooms at VA facilities suspended; support lines for caregivers reduced; Veterans Crisis Line employees fired; and suicide prevention training sessions postponed or canceled.

The Trump administration’s plans to study the “threat” posed by psychiatric medications in children have medical societies and mental health professionals concerned that the administration may be considering restrictions on the use of psychotropic drugs in pediatric patients.

An executive order signed last week created the “Make American Healthy Again Commission” to investigate the nation’s “escalating health crisis,” particularly in child health. Recently confirmed Secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will chair the effort.

As part of its investigation, the executive order directed the commission to assess “the prevalence of and threat posed by the prescription of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, stimulants, and weight-loss drugs.”

A report on the commission’s findings is due in a little less than 100 days. Eighty days later, the commission must submit recommendations for federal action.

Although who the commission members are and the scope of its work is unclear, the language in the executive order — namely the implication that the Trump administration views psychotropic medication as a “threat” to children — was enough to prompt psychiatrists from across the country to contact the American Psychiatric Association (APA) about possible limitations on the use of psychotropic medications in pediatric patients.

“It’s concerning and surprising that some of our nation’s most vulnerable children who need these treatments to participate fully in life would be under scrutiny in this way,” Marketa Wills, MD, MBA, chief executive officer and medical director for the APA, told this news organization.

“If these medications are under threat and children decompensate that would not be good from a public health perspective, for the healthcare system or for the families we serve,” Wills said.

 

Past Comments Fuel Distress

Past comments by the commission chair have only fueled distress over the commission’s goals. Kennedy has long expressed skepticism about antidepressants, especially (SSRIs), questioning their safety and suggesting they are as addictive as heroin. 

“I know people, including members of my family, who’ve had a much worse time getting off of SSRIs than they have getting off of heroin,” Kennedy said during his Senate confirmation hearing in late January.

But there is no evidence to suggest SSRIs or other antidepressants are addictive, Leslie A. Hulvershorn, MD, chair and associate professor of psychiatry at Indiana University School of Medicine, told this news organization.

“They don’t work in the systems of the brain that drive addiction. A large amount of research suggests that they are safe to take for a long time,” she said. “I suspect the confusion comes from the difference between it not being wise to come off of the medication, because of a concern for relapse of a psychiatric illness, and some transient discomfort from abruptly stopping SSRIs without tapering them off versus being addicted to it, like heroin.”

During the hearing, Kennedy was also asked to respond to comments he made during a 2023 livestream on X in which he claimed that the use of antidepressants have contributed to the increase in school shootings in the United States.

“I am also going to look very closely at the role of psychiatric drugs in these events and there are no good studies right now that should have been done years ago on this issue because there is a tremendous circumstantial evidence that SSRIs and benzos and other drugs are doing this,” he said in the livestream. 

Research has shown that there is no link between school shootings and antidepressant use.

In a 2024 interview on the Latino Capitalist podcast, Kennedy said that he wanted create “wellness farms” for adults addicted to illicit drugs and children who take antidepressants or stimulants for ADHD could be “reparented.”

“The views on those wellness farms are concerning for us here at the American Psychiatric Association. It remains to be seen if he brings that back up in his new role at HHS. There is currently no evidence of their efficacy,” Wills said.

 

Fear Is a ‘Real Concern’

These controversial comments, combined with the commission’s charge to investigate the potential “threat” psychotropic medications pose to children, worry clinicians and families fear that access to medication could be restricted.

“Psychiatrists and patients are very concerned about the risk these statements may pose,” Hulvershorn said.

“Certainly, there is evidence that psychotropic medications are overprescribed, particularly in children who are in state care — like wards of the state — and who are part of Medicaid programs, but there is tremendous overall benefit associated with psychotropic medications in youth and adults. They are lifesaving and game changing in many instances,” she added.

Psychiatrists who’ve contacted the APA since last week’s announcement echo Hulvershorn’s comments. 

“The fear is the real concern,” Wills said. “No parent takes the decision lightly to put their child on medication. With all interventions, particularly with children, there are risks and benefits that must be carefully weighed. The best person to weigh those risks and benefits is the child and adolescent psychiatrist, in conjunction with the child’s parents.”

The focus on medication also overlooks the fact that psychosocial interventions — not medication — are first-line treatment for children with mental health issues and that guidelines recommend medication be used alongside nonpharmacological therapy.

“Extensive research, including large national multi-site studies, have examined the most effective ways to reduce psychological symptoms among youth, including anxiety, depression, and ADHD. Results consistently reveal that both psychotropic medications and psychological interventions can offer significant improvements, often in combination,” Mitch Prinstein, PhD, chief of psychology strategy and integration at the American Psychological Association, told this news organization. 

“Given the substantial challenges for many in gaining access to psychotherapy and a national shortage of licensed psychologists, reducing access to medications would undoubtedly have a debilitating effect of the already concerning youth mental health crisis,” Prinstein said. 

 

A Seat at The Table

While the launch of the commission has left some feeling uneasy, experts agree that a national focus on children’s mental health is needed.

The APA would “welcome an opportunity to be part of this national conversation following the evidence base, following settled science that shows when and how these medications are effective and helpful for children and families,” said Wills. “We also think it’s very important that child and adolescent psychiatrists be at the table for this national conversation on behalf of the families they serve.” 

In a joint letter with the APA, officials with the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry also expressed interest in playing a role in the commission’s work. 

“We are in the middle of a mental health crisis, with a record number of Americans struggling with mental health and substance use disorders. We strongly urge you to prioritize strengthening the ability to respond to an increasing demand for psychiatric services, especially for children,” the letter stated.

Indeed, looking beyond just the use of psychotropic medications is vital to the success of any strategy to address the youth mental health crisis, Hulvershorn noted. 

“There are already many programs underway to examine the overprescribing. In my view, the lack of supports by payors for behavioral interventions, such as evidence-based family interventions, psychotherapies, etc., is the major driver for overuse of medications,” she said.

“Every pediatrician and child psychiatrist I know would rather try a behavioral intervention with a family first, but those are services that our systems do not financially support well and are, thus, underdeveloped, and very difficult to access,” Hulvershorn added.

More funding for evidence-based interventions — both behavioral and pharmacological — is desperately needed, she said. Support for workforce development should also be a part of any proposed solution. 

“Adequate and responsible funding in all of those areas is needed, but we have some low hanging fruit in terms of figuring out how to just deliver the interventions that science has shown us do work,” Hulvershorn said. “Many of those interventions don’t involve medication and I think every expert in the field would be glad to see more effort put into system reform to better deliver interventions that work to youth and their families.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The Trump administration’s plans to study the “threat” posed by psychiatric medications in children have medical societies and mental health professionals concerned that the administration may be considering restrictions on the use of psychotropic drugs in pediatric patients.

An executive order signed last week created the “Make American Healthy Again Commission” to investigate the nation’s “escalating health crisis,” particularly in child health. Recently confirmed Secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will chair the effort.

As part of its investigation, the executive order directed the commission to assess “the prevalence of and threat posed by the prescription of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, stimulants, and weight-loss drugs.”

A report on the commission’s findings is due in a little less than 100 days. Eighty days later, the commission must submit recommendations for federal action.

Although who the commission members are and the scope of its work is unclear, the language in the executive order — namely the implication that the Trump administration views psychotropic medication as a “threat” to children — was enough to prompt psychiatrists from across the country to contact the American Psychiatric Association (APA) about possible limitations on the use of psychotropic medications in pediatric patients.

“It’s concerning and surprising that some of our nation’s most vulnerable children who need these treatments to participate fully in life would be under scrutiny in this way,” Marketa Wills, MD, MBA, chief executive officer and medical director for the APA, told this news organization.

“If these medications are under threat and children decompensate that would not be good from a public health perspective, for the healthcare system or for the families we serve,” Wills said.

 

Past Comments Fuel Distress

Past comments by the commission chair have only fueled distress over the commission’s goals. Kennedy has long expressed skepticism about antidepressants, especially (SSRIs), questioning their safety and suggesting they are as addictive as heroin. 

“I know people, including members of my family, who’ve had a much worse time getting off of SSRIs than they have getting off of heroin,” Kennedy said during his Senate confirmation hearing in late January.

But there is no evidence to suggest SSRIs or other antidepressants are addictive, Leslie A. Hulvershorn, MD, chair and associate professor of psychiatry at Indiana University School of Medicine, told this news organization.

“They don’t work in the systems of the brain that drive addiction. A large amount of research suggests that they are safe to take for a long time,” she said. “I suspect the confusion comes from the difference between it not being wise to come off of the medication, because of a concern for relapse of a psychiatric illness, and some transient discomfort from abruptly stopping SSRIs without tapering them off versus being addicted to it, like heroin.”

During the hearing, Kennedy was also asked to respond to comments he made during a 2023 livestream on X in which he claimed that the use of antidepressants have contributed to the increase in school shootings in the United States.

“I am also going to look very closely at the role of psychiatric drugs in these events and there are no good studies right now that should have been done years ago on this issue because there is a tremendous circumstantial evidence that SSRIs and benzos and other drugs are doing this,” he said in the livestream. 

Research has shown that there is no link between school shootings and antidepressant use.

In a 2024 interview on the Latino Capitalist podcast, Kennedy said that he wanted create “wellness farms” for adults addicted to illicit drugs and children who take antidepressants or stimulants for ADHD could be “reparented.”

“The views on those wellness farms are concerning for us here at the American Psychiatric Association. It remains to be seen if he brings that back up in his new role at HHS. There is currently no evidence of their efficacy,” Wills said.

 

Fear Is a ‘Real Concern’

These controversial comments, combined with the commission’s charge to investigate the potential “threat” psychotropic medications pose to children, worry clinicians and families fear that access to medication could be restricted.

“Psychiatrists and patients are very concerned about the risk these statements may pose,” Hulvershorn said.

“Certainly, there is evidence that psychotropic medications are overprescribed, particularly in children who are in state care — like wards of the state — and who are part of Medicaid programs, but there is tremendous overall benefit associated with psychotropic medications in youth and adults. They are lifesaving and game changing in many instances,” she added.

Psychiatrists who’ve contacted the APA since last week’s announcement echo Hulvershorn’s comments. 

“The fear is the real concern,” Wills said. “No parent takes the decision lightly to put their child on medication. With all interventions, particularly with children, there are risks and benefits that must be carefully weighed. The best person to weigh those risks and benefits is the child and adolescent psychiatrist, in conjunction with the child’s parents.”

The focus on medication also overlooks the fact that psychosocial interventions — not medication — are first-line treatment for children with mental health issues and that guidelines recommend medication be used alongside nonpharmacological therapy.

“Extensive research, including large national multi-site studies, have examined the most effective ways to reduce psychological symptoms among youth, including anxiety, depression, and ADHD. Results consistently reveal that both psychotropic medications and psychological interventions can offer significant improvements, often in combination,” Mitch Prinstein, PhD, chief of psychology strategy and integration at the American Psychological Association, told this news organization. 

“Given the substantial challenges for many in gaining access to psychotherapy and a national shortage of licensed psychologists, reducing access to medications would undoubtedly have a debilitating effect of the already concerning youth mental health crisis,” Prinstein said. 

 

A Seat at The Table

While the launch of the commission has left some feeling uneasy, experts agree that a national focus on children’s mental health is needed.

The APA would “welcome an opportunity to be part of this national conversation following the evidence base, following settled science that shows when and how these medications are effective and helpful for children and families,” said Wills. “We also think it’s very important that child and adolescent psychiatrists be at the table for this national conversation on behalf of the families they serve.” 

In a joint letter with the APA, officials with the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry also expressed interest in playing a role in the commission’s work. 

“We are in the middle of a mental health crisis, with a record number of Americans struggling with mental health and substance use disorders. We strongly urge you to prioritize strengthening the ability to respond to an increasing demand for psychiatric services, especially for children,” the letter stated.

Indeed, looking beyond just the use of psychotropic medications is vital to the success of any strategy to address the youth mental health crisis, Hulvershorn noted. 

“There are already many programs underway to examine the overprescribing. In my view, the lack of supports by payors for behavioral interventions, such as evidence-based family interventions, psychotherapies, etc., is the major driver for overuse of medications,” she said.

“Every pediatrician and child psychiatrist I know would rather try a behavioral intervention with a family first, but those are services that our systems do not financially support well and are, thus, underdeveloped, and very difficult to access,” Hulvershorn added.

More funding for evidence-based interventions — both behavioral and pharmacological — is desperately needed, she said. Support for workforce development should also be a part of any proposed solution. 

“Adequate and responsible funding in all of those areas is needed, but we have some low hanging fruit in terms of figuring out how to just deliver the interventions that science has shown us do work,” Hulvershorn said. “Many of those interventions don’t involve medication and I think every expert in the field would be glad to see more effort put into system reform to better deliver interventions that work to youth and their families.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The Trump administration’s plans to study the “threat” posed by psychiatric medications in children have medical societies and mental health professionals concerned that the administration may be considering restrictions on the use of psychotropic drugs in pediatric patients.

An executive order signed last week created the “Make American Healthy Again Commission” to investigate the nation’s “escalating health crisis,” particularly in child health. Recently confirmed Secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will chair the effort.

As part of its investigation, the executive order directed the commission to assess “the prevalence of and threat posed by the prescription of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, stimulants, and weight-loss drugs.”

A report on the commission’s findings is due in a little less than 100 days. Eighty days later, the commission must submit recommendations for federal action.

Although who the commission members are and the scope of its work is unclear, the language in the executive order — namely the implication that the Trump administration views psychotropic medication as a “threat” to children — was enough to prompt psychiatrists from across the country to contact the American Psychiatric Association (APA) about possible limitations on the use of psychotropic medications in pediatric patients.

“It’s concerning and surprising that some of our nation’s most vulnerable children who need these treatments to participate fully in life would be under scrutiny in this way,” Marketa Wills, MD, MBA, chief executive officer and medical director for the APA, told this news organization.

“If these medications are under threat and children decompensate that would not be good from a public health perspective, for the healthcare system or for the families we serve,” Wills said.

 

Past Comments Fuel Distress

Past comments by the commission chair have only fueled distress over the commission’s goals. Kennedy has long expressed skepticism about antidepressants, especially (SSRIs), questioning their safety and suggesting they are as addictive as heroin. 

“I know people, including members of my family, who’ve had a much worse time getting off of SSRIs than they have getting off of heroin,” Kennedy said during his Senate confirmation hearing in late January.

But there is no evidence to suggest SSRIs or other antidepressants are addictive, Leslie A. Hulvershorn, MD, chair and associate professor of psychiatry at Indiana University School of Medicine, told this news organization.

“They don’t work in the systems of the brain that drive addiction. A large amount of research suggests that they are safe to take for a long time,” she said. “I suspect the confusion comes from the difference between it not being wise to come off of the medication, because of a concern for relapse of a psychiatric illness, and some transient discomfort from abruptly stopping SSRIs without tapering them off versus being addicted to it, like heroin.”

During the hearing, Kennedy was also asked to respond to comments he made during a 2023 livestream on X in which he claimed that the use of antidepressants have contributed to the increase in school shootings in the United States.

“I am also going to look very closely at the role of psychiatric drugs in these events and there are no good studies right now that should have been done years ago on this issue because there is a tremendous circumstantial evidence that SSRIs and benzos and other drugs are doing this,” he said in the livestream. 

Research has shown that there is no link between school shootings and antidepressant use.

In a 2024 interview on the Latino Capitalist podcast, Kennedy said that he wanted create “wellness farms” for adults addicted to illicit drugs and children who take antidepressants or stimulants for ADHD could be “reparented.”

“The views on those wellness farms are concerning for us here at the American Psychiatric Association. It remains to be seen if he brings that back up in his new role at HHS. There is currently no evidence of their efficacy,” Wills said.

 

Fear Is a ‘Real Concern’

These controversial comments, combined with the commission’s charge to investigate the potential “threat” psychotropic medications pose to children, worry clinicians and families fear that access to medication could be restricted.

“Psychiatrists and patients are very concerned about the risk these statements may pose,” Hulvershorn said.

“Certainly, there is evidence that psychotropic medications are overprescribed, particularly in children who are in state care — like wards of the state — and who are part of Medicaid programs, but there is tremendous overall benefit associated with psychotropic medications in youth and adults. They are lifesaving and game changing in many instances,” she added.

Psychiatrists who’ve contacted the APA since last week’s announcement echo Hulvershorn’s comments. 

“The fear is the real concern,” Wills said. “No parent takes the decision lightly to put their child on medication. With all interventions, particularly with children, there are risks and benefits that must be carefully weighed. The best person to weigh those risks and benefits is the child and adolescent psychiatrist, in conjunction with the child’s parents.”

The focus on medication also overlooks the fact that psychosocial interventions — not medication — are first-line treatment for children with mental health issues and that guidelines recommend medication be used alongside nonpharmacological therapy.

“Extensive research, including large national multi-site studies, have examined the most effective ways to reduce psychological symptoms among youth, including anxiety, depression, and ADHD. Results consistently reveal that both psychotropic medications and psychological interventions can offer significant improvements, often in combination,” Mitch Prinstein, PhD, chief of psychology strategy and integration at the American Psychological Association, told this news organization. 

“Given the substantial challenges for many in gaining access to psychotherapy and a national shortage of licensed psychologists, reducing access to medications would undoubtedly have a debilitating effect of the already concerning youth mental health crisis,” Prinstein said. 

 

A Seat at The Table

While the launch of the commission has left some feeling uneasy, experts agree that a national focus on children’s mental health is needed.

The APA would “welcome an opportunity to be part of this national conversation following the evidence base, following settled science that shows when and how these medications are effective and helpful for children and families,” said Wills. “We also think it’s very important that child and adolescent psychiatrists be at the table for this national conversation on behalf of the families they serve.” 

In a joint letter with the APA, officials with the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry also expressed interest in playing a role in the commission’s work. 

“We are in the middle of a mental health crisis, with a record number of Americans struggling with mental health and substance use disorders. We strongly urge you to prioritize strengthening the ability to respond to an increasing demand for psychiatric services, especially for children,” the letter stated.

Indeed, looking beyond just the use of psychotropic medications is vital to the success of any strategy to address the youth mental health crisis, Hulvershorn noted. 

“There are already many programs underway to examine the overprescribing. In my view, the lack of supports by payors for behavioral interventions, such as evidence-based family interventions, psychotherapies, etc., is the major driver for overuse of medications,” she said.

“Every pediatrician and child psychiatrist I know would rather try a behavioral intervention with a family first, but those are services that our systems do not financially support well and are, thus, underdeveloped, and very difficult to access,” Hulvershorn added.

More funding for evidence-based interventions — both behavioral and pharmacological — is desperately needed, she said. Support for workforce development should also be a part of any proposed solution. 

“Adequate and responsible funding in all of those areas is needed, but we have some low hanging fruit in terms of figuring out how to just deliver the interventions that science has shown us do work,” Hulvershorn said. “Many of those interventions don’t involve medication and I think every expert in the field would be glad to see more effort put into system reform to better deliver interventions that work to youth and their families.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) announced on Feb. 7, 2025, that 116 Veterans Health Administration job classifications will not be eligible for the deferred resignation plan emailed by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). The exemptions include Title 38 and Hybrid Title 38 positions, including doctors, nurses, and most medical staff.

The original OPM email offer had a Feb. 6, 2025, deadline for accepting the offer and a resignation date of no later than Sept. 30, 2025. However, the offer has been put on hold following a limited temporary restraining order from a Federal District Court in Massachusetts. Judge George O’Toole enjoined the OPM from “taking any further action to implement the so-called Fork Directive.” Arguments on the program’s legal merits began at a separate hearing on Monday.

The 116 roles exempted include physicians, nurses, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians, therapists, data scientists, dieticians, health and medical instrument technicians, among other roles.

OPM also included Voluntary Early Retirement Authority (VERA) in the deferred resignation offer. In a Feb. 6 email, the VA’s Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer (OCHCO) said: “The Department of Veterans Affairs established a list of occupations that are excluded from participating in DRP and VERA. If your occupation is on this list, you are not eligible to participate in the DRP.”

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) announced on Feb. 7, 2025, that 116 Veterans Health Administration job classifications will not be eligible for the deferred resignation plan emailed by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). The exemptions include Title 38 and Hybrid Title 38 positions, including doctors, nurses, and most medical staff.

The original OPM email offer had a Feb. 6, 2025, deadline for accepting the offer and a resignation date of no later than Sept. 30, 2025. However, the offer has been put on hold following a limited temporary restraining order from a Federal District Court in Massachusetts. Judge George O’Toole enjoined the OPM from “taking any further action to implement the so-called Fork Directive.” Arguments on the program’s legal merits began at a separate hearing on Monday.

The 116 roles exempted include physicians, nurses, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians, therapists, data scientists, dieticians, health and medical instrument technicians, among other roles.

OPM also included Voluntary Early Retirement Authority (VERA) in the deferred resignation offer. In a Feb. 6 email, the VA’s Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer (OCHCO) said: “The Department of Veterans Affairs established a list of occupations that are excluded from participating in DRP and VERA. If your occupation is on this list, you are not eligible to participate in the DRP.”

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) announced on Feb. 7, 2025, that 116 Veterans Health Administration job classifications will not be eligible for the deferred resignation plan emailed by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). The exemptions include Title 38 and Hybrid Title 38 positions, including doctors, nurses, and most medical staff.

The original OPM email offer had a Feb. 6, 2025, deadline for accepting the offer and a resignation date of no later than Sept. 30, 2025. However, the offer has been put on hold following a limited temporary restraining order from a Federal District Court in Massachusetts. Judge George O’Toole enjoined the OPM from “taking any further action to implement the so-called Fork Directive.” Arguments on the program’s legal merits began at a separate hearing on Monday.

The 116 roles exempted include physicians, nurses, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians, therapists, data scientists, dieticians, health and medical instrument technicians, among other roles.

OPM also included Voluntary Early Retirement Authority (VERA) in the deferred resignation offer. In a Feb. 6 email, the VA’s Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer (OCHCO) said: “The Department of Veterans Affairs established a list of occupations that are excluded from participating in DRP and VERA. If your occupation is on this list, you are not eligible to participate in the DRP.”

The U.S. Senate confirmed former Georgia congressman Doug Collins as the Secretary for the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) on Feb. 4 in a comfortable 77 to 23 vote. Collins received votes from every Republican Senator and 23 Democratic Senators.

“The MISSION Act, the VA Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act and the PACT Act are 3 of the most important veterans laws in recent history,” Collins said during his confirmation hearing. “They received widespread bipartisan support because their focus is exactly where VA’s focus should be: on veteran convenience and accountability for the department.” 

Collins pledged to keep the VA strong but also to expand community care, noting: “I believe you can have both, you can have a strong VA as it currently exists, and you can have the community care aspect.”

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), who voted to confirm Collins, urged the secretary to exempt all VA employees from the Trump Administration’s recent hiring freeze; ensure that financial assistance programs for veterans are exempt from funding pauses; work with President Trump to reappoint VA Inspector General Mike Missal, who was removed from office by the President in January; and to ensure all VA employees receive due process amid recent directives from the Office of Personnel Management.

The VA also announced a number of new political appointees, including Chris Syrek, who set to serve as chief of staff; Cheryl Mason is slated to serve as senior advisory to Secretary Collins; and Lynda Davis is set to serve as the chief officer with VA's Veterans Experience Office. No nominations have been made for the Undersecretary of Health to date.

The U.S. Senate confirmed former Georgia congressman Doug Collins as the Secretary for the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) on Feb. 4 in a comfortable 77 to 23 vote. Collins received votes from every Republican Senator and 23 Democratic Senators.

“The MISSION Act, the VA Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act and the PACT Act are 3 of the most important veterans laws in recent history,” Collins said during his confirmation hearing. “They received widespread bipartisan support because their focus is exactly where VA’s focus should be: on veteran convenience and accountability for the department.” 

Collins pledged to keep the VA strong but also to expand community care, noting: “I believe you can have both, you can have a strong VA as it currently exists, and you can have the community care aspect.”

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), who voted to confirm Collins, urged the secretary to exempt all VA employees from the Trump Administration’s recent hiring freeze; ensure that financial assistance programs for veterans are exempt from funding pauses; work with President Trump to reappoint VA Inspector General Mike Missal, who was removed from office by the President in January; and to ensure all VA employees receive due process amid recent directives from the Office of Personnel Management.

The VA also announced a number of new political appointees, including Chris Syrek, who set to serve as chief of staff; Cheryl Mason is slated to serve as senior advisory to Secretary Collins; and Lynda Davis is set to serve as the chief officer with VA's Veterans Experience Office. No nominations have been made for the Undersecretary of Health to date.

The U.S. Senate confirmed former Georgia congressman Doug Collins as the Secretary for the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) on Feb. 4 in a comfortable 77 to 23 vote. Collins received votes from every Republican Senator and 23 Democratic Senators.

“The MISSION Act, the VA Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act and the PACT Act are 3 of the most important veterans laws in recent history,” Collins said during his confirmation hearing. “They received widespread bipartisan support because their focus is exactly where VA’s focus should be: on veteran convenience and accountability for the department.” 

Collins pledged to keep the VA strong but also to expand community care, noting: “I believe you can have both, you can have a strong VA as it currently exists, and you can have the community care aspect.”

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), who voted to confirm Collins, urged the secretary to exempt all VA employees from the Trump Administration’s recent hiring freeze; ensure that financial assistance programs for veterans are exempt from funding pauses; work with President Trump to reappoint VA Inspector General Mike Missal, who was removed from office by the President in January; and to ensure all VA employees receive due process amid recent directives from the Office of Personnel Management.

The VA also announced a number of new political appointees, including Chris Syrek, who set to serve as chief of staff; Cheryl Mason is slated to serve as senior advisory to Secretary Collins; and Lynda Davis is set to serve as the chief officer with VA's Veterans Experience Office. No nominations have been made for the Undersecretary of Health to date.

Nearly 96,000 US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) employees—about 20% of the workforce—will be required to return to in-office work by the end of February. The announcement follows a Jan. 20 presidential memorandum, which states agency heads must “take all necessary steps to terminate remote work arrangements and require employees to return to work in-person at their respective duty stations on a full-time basis.” According to a Jan. 28 email sent from the Office of Personnel Management but without a signature, federal employees who refuse will be offered “dignified, fair departure from the federal government utilizing a deferred resignation program.”

The revised VA work policy states “eligible employees must work full-time at their respective duty stations (agency worksites) unless excused due to a disability, qualifying medical condition or other compelling reason.” All nonbargaining unit employees and supervisors who are within 50 miles of their office have until Feb. 24 to return. The VA stated that further guidance is coming for those who live > 50 miles from a facility. 

“VA’s policy allows exceptions for arrangements approved for employees as a reasonable accommodation due to a disability or a qualifying medical condition. Exceptions may also be allowed for military spouses with permanent change of station orders,” according to a VA press release.

“This is a commonsense step toward treating all VA employees equally,” acting VA Secretary Todd Hunter said. “Most VA clinical staff don’t have the luxury of working remotely, and we believe the performance, collaboration and productivity of the department will improve if all VA employees are held to the same standard.” 

The impact on Veterans Health Administration operations remains difficult to determine. The order appears to include personnel providing telehealth care from remote locations, including those at the Clinical Resource Hub (CRH) program. CRH uses a hub and spoke model for limited time primary care and mental health care staffing to cover local clinician vacancies. CRH clinicians have provided > 500,000 veterans with care, averaging > 25,000 encounters in the program’s first year. Started during fiscal year 2020 amid the COVID-19 pandemic, CRH employed 636 clinicians, but more recent data are not available. The VA provided > 28 million telehealth sessions to veterans across all of its telehealth modalities in 2023. Details on how many CRH clinicians and other telehealth practitioners work remotely are also not available.

On Feb. 3, the Office of Personnel Management issued a memo to federal agency heads arguing that any collective bargaining agreements that include teleworking may “conflict with management rights” and therefore may be “unlawful and cannot be enforced.”

The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), which represents 800,000 federal employees, disputed the memo. “Federal employees should know that approved union contracts are enforceable by law, and the President does not have the authority to make unilateral changes to those agreements,” AFGE President Everett Kelley said. “AFGE members will not be intimidated. If our contracts are violated, we will aggressively defend them.”

The VA must decide where to put the more than 47,000 workers who may be coming back. According to the Government Accountability Office, “Federal agencies have long struggled to determine how much office space they needed to fulfill their missions efficiently.” The VA has reduced its office space by > 290,000 ft² over the last few years in the National Capital Region alone. 

In his confirmation hearing last month, VA Secretary nominee Doug Collins told lawmakers that, if confirmed, he would “encourage employees to come back to work,” but he also said he would ensure the department was following the White House’s remote work limits. “We’re going to make sure that we get people in there,” he said, “because at the end of the day, it’s about veterans.”

Nearly 96,000 US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) employees—about 20% of the workforce—will be required to return to in-office work by the end of February. The announcement follows a Jan. 20 presidential memorandum, which states agency heads must “take all necessary steps to terminate remote work arrangements and require employees to return to work in-person at their respective duty stations on a full-time basis.” According to a Jan. 28 email sent from the Office of Personnel Management but without a signature, federal employees who refuse will be offered “dignified, fair departure from the federal government utilizing a deferred resignation program.”

The revised VA work policy states “eligible employees must work full-time at their respective duty stations (agency worksites) unless excused due to a disability, qualifying medical condition or other compelling reason.” All nonbargaining unit employees and supervisors who are within 50 miles of their office have until Feb. 24 to return. The VA stated that further guidance is coming for those who live > 50 miles from a facility. 

“VA’s policy allows exceptions for arrangements approved for employees as a reasonable accommodation due to a disability or a qualifying medical condition. Exceptions may also be allowed for military spouses with permanent change of station orders,” according to a VA press release.

“This is a commonsense step toward treating all VA employees equally,” acting VA Secretary Todd Hunter said. “Most VA clinical staff don’t have the luxury of working remotely, and we believe the performance, collaboration and productivity of the department will improve if all VA employees are held to the same standard.” 

The impact on Veterans Health Administration operations remains difficult to determine. The order appears to include personnel providing telehealth care from remote locations, including those at the Clinical Resource Hub (CRH) program. CRH uses a hub and spoke model for limited time primary care and mental health care staffing to cover local clinician vacancies. CRH clinicians have provided > 500,000 veterans with care, averaging > 25,000 encounters in the program’s first year. Started during fiscal year 2020 amid the COVID-19 pandemic, CRH employed 636 clinicians, but more recent data are not available. The VA provided > 28 million telehealth sessions to veterans across all of its telehealth modalities in 2023. Details on how many CRH clinicians and other telehealth practitioners work remotely are also not available.

On Feb. 3, the Office of Personnel Management issued a memo to federal agency heads arguing that any collective bargaining agreements that include teleworking may “conflict with management rights” and therefore may be “unlawful and cannot be enforced.”

The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), which represents 800,000 federal employees, disputed the memo. “Federal employees should know that approved union contracts are enforceable by law, and the President does not have the authority to make unilateral changes to those agreements,” AFGE President Everett Kelley said. “AFGE members will not be intimidated. If our contracts are violated, we will aggressively defend them.”

The VA must decide where to put the more than 47,000 workers who may be coming back. According to the Government Accountability Office, “Federal agencies have long struggled to determine how much office space they needed to fulfill their missions efficiently.” The VA has reduced its office space by > 290,000 ft² over the last few years in the National Capital Region alone. 

In his confirmation hearing last month, VA Secretary nominee Doug Collins told lawmakers that, if confirmed, he would “encourage employees to come back to work,” but he also said he would ensure the department was following the White House’s remote work limits. “We’re going to make sure that we get people in there,” he said, “because at the end of the day, it’s about veterans.”

Nearly 96,000 US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) employees—about 20% of the workforce—will be required to return to in-office work by the end of February. The announcement follows a Jan. 20 presidential memorandum, which states agency heads must “take all necessary steps to terminate remote work arrangements and require employees to return to work in-person at their respective duty stations on a full-time basis.” According to a Jan. 28 email sent from the Office of Personnel Management but without a signature, federal employees who refuse will be offered “dignified, fair departure from the federal government utilizing a deferred resignation program.”

The revised VA work policy states “eligible employees must work full-time at their respective duty stations (agency worksites) unless excused due to a disability, qualifying medical condition or other compelling reason.” All nonbargaining unit employees and supervisors who are within 50 miles of their office have until Feb. 24 to return. The VA stated that further guidance is coming for those who live > 50 miles from a facility. 

“VA’s policy allows exceptions for arrangements approved for employees as a reasonable accommodation due to a disability or a qualifying medical condition. Exceptions may also be allowed for military spouses with permanent change of station orders,” according to a VA press release.

“This is a commonsense step toward treating all VA employees equally,” acting VA Secretary Todd Hunter said. “Most VA clinical staff don’t have the luxury of working remotely, and we believe the performance, collaboration and productivity of the department will improve if all VA employees are held to the same standard.” 

The impact on Veterans Health Administration operations remains difficult to determine. The order appears to include personnel providing telehealth care from remote locations, including those at the Clinical Resource Hub (CRH) program. CRH uses a hub and spoke model for limited time primary care and mental health care staffing to cover local clinician vacancies. CRH clinicians have provided > 500,000 veterans with care, averaging > 25,000 encounters in the program’s first year. Started during fiscal year 2020 amid the COVID-19 pandemic, CRH employed 636 clinicians, but more recent data are not available. The VA provided > 28 million telehealth sessions to veterans across all of its telehealth modalities in 2023. Details on how many CRH clinicians and other telehealth practitioners work remotely are also not available.

On Feb. 3, the Office of Personnel Management issued a memo to federal agency heads arguing that any collective bargaining agreements that include teleworking may “conflict with management rights” and therefore may be “unlawful and cannot be enforced.”

The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), which represents 800,000 federal employees, disputed the memo. “Federal employees should know that approved union contracts are enforceable by law, and the President does not have the authority to make unilateral changes to those agreements,” AFGE President Everett Kelley said. “AFGE members will not be intimidated. If our contracts are violated, we will aggressively defend them.”

The VA must decide where to put the more than 47,000 workers who may be coming back. According to the Government Accountability Office, “Federal agencies have long struggled to determine how much office space they needed to fulfill their missions efficiently.” The VA has reduced its office space by > 290,000 ft² over the last few years in the National Capital Region alone. 

In his confirmation hearing last month, VA Secretary nominee Doug Collins told lawmakers that, if confirmed, he would “encourage employees to come back to work,” but he also said he would ensure the department was following the White House’s remote work limits. “We’re going to make sure that we get people in there,” he said, “because at the end of the day, it’s about veterans.”

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has outlined > 300,000 exemptions to the federal hiring freeze to fill essential benefits and health positions. The exempted positions are primarily medical support staff. While the exemptions include pharmacists, physicians and nurses were not included. The day after taking office for the second time, President Trump signed an Executive Order implementing a “freeze on the hiring of Federal civilian employees, to be applied throughout the executive branch” but left many of the details to individual agencies.

Set to last 90 days, the hiring freeze forced Federal agencies to develop plans to reduce the size of their workforces through efficiencies and attrition, Trump said. These agencies would also not be able to hire contractors.

Three days later, however, the VA responded “Following successful implementation of President Trump’s federal hiring freeze, the Department of Veterans Affairs announced several exemptions to the policy. These exemptions clarify the department’s ability to continue filling essential positions that provide health care and other vital services to Veterans and VA beneficiaries.”

This allowed > 304,000 jobs to be exempt from the freeze. Almost 92% of the VA’s 450,000 employees work in health care and health administration and support services. Most of the exemptions involve support staff. No physicians, mental health professionals or nursing positions are on the list. However, it does include 12,622 pharmacists and 5,975 pharmacy technicians. 

The VA worked in accordance with the White House and Office of Personnel Management to develop the updated guidance, Acting Veterans Affairs Secretary Todd Hunter said. In a Jan. 21 memo, Hunter wrote: "Positions critical to delivering care to veterans in the Veteran[s] Health Administration ... are exempted under the category of public safety.”

According to Hunter's memo, no other vacancies that existed as of midday Monday will be filled. Candidates who received job offers before noon on Jan. 20 and have a start date on or before Feb. 8 will be onboarded, while those with a start date after Feb. 8—or one that is undetermined—will have their offers rescinded.

The first Trump Administration began the same way in 2017, initiating a freeze on Federal hiring and receiving a similar response from the VA. In 2017, the hiring of doctors and nurses continued while that freeze was in effect, but onboarding of new support and administrative staff was not. Then-Secretary of Veterans Affairs Dr. David J. Shulkin said, “VA is committed to serving veterans, but at the same time improving efficiency and reducing bureaucracy.” 

The current Executive Order states it “shall not adversely impact veterans’ benefits and does not apply to positions related to public safety” (or military personnel, immigration enforcement, and national security). It also says it does not adversely impact the provision of Social Security, Medicare, or Veterans’ benefits. 

“Under President Trump’s leadership, VA will always do what is necessary to provide America’s Veterans with the benefits and services they have earned. The targeted hiring-freeze exemptions announced today underscore that fact,” said VA Director of Media Affairs Morgan Ackley.  

Some in Congress feel the VA should be doing more, though, and are pushing for an exemption of all VA employees. On Friday, Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee Ranking Member Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) released a statement on the exemptions. “The latest Administration hiring freeze announcement still falls short. While I’m encouraged the President responded to our concerns by exempting certain VA personnel, only a clear, unequivocal statement to exempt all VA employees from the hiring freeze will reassure me—and veterans—they will receive the care and benefits they need and deserve. The exemptions listed yesterday provide more questions than answers and fail to include key personnel, including Veterans Benefits Administration employees. The Trump Administration is going to try to confuse the issue with a lot of vague assurances. We need a clear commitment every VA employee is exempt—effective immediately. Moreover, the Trump Administration must address the offers it has already rescinded that are now exempt.”

Blumenthal and 24 Democratic Senators also signed a letter to that effect, stressing concerns about the negative impact the hiring freeze will have on the delivery of veterans’ health care and benefits nationwide “if not quickly reversed.” Blumenthal also pressed Doug Collins (R-GA), Trump’s nominee for VA Secretary, to push back against a hiring freeze at VA, if his nomination is confirmed: “This is going to be a first test of your leadership.”

“We’ll take a look at the current levels of employees that we have and where they’re properly located,” Collins said, adding that he was “still examining” the freeze’s impact on the VA. “We will work under the Executive Order [Trump] has given us.” 

Blumenthal argued that the new exemptions exclude a number of critical positions at VA. Among them include all positions at the Veterans Benefits Administration and National Cemetery Administration, which provide veterans’ claims processing, survivor benefits, GI Bill education benefits, and burial scheduling and operations; many nonclinical positions critical to VA hospital functioning, including patient advocates, food service workers, and chaplains; and positions relating to construction project management for new hospitals and clinics, new nursing homes, new cemetery construction, leases, and repairs to existing VA facilities.

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has outlined > 300,000 exemptions to the federal hiring freeze to fill essential benefits and health positions. The exempted positions are primarily medical support staff. While the exemptions include pharmacists, physicians and nurses were not included. The day after taking office for the second time, President Trump signed an Executive Order implementing a “freeze on the hiring of Federal civilian employees, to be applied throughout the executive branch” but left many of the details to individual agencies.

Set to last 90 days, the hiring freeze forced Federal agencies to develop plans to reduce the size of their workforces through efficiencies and attrition, Trump said. These agencies would also not be able to hire contractors.

Three days later, however, the VA responded “Following successful implementation of President Trump’s federal hiring freeze, the Department of Veterans Affairs announced several exemptions to the policy. These exemptions clarify the department’s ability to continue filling essential positions that provide health care and other vital services to Veterans and VA beneficiaries.”

This allowed > 304,000 jobs to be exempt from the freeze. Almost 92% of the VA’s 450,000 employees work in health care and health administration and support services. Most of the exemptions involve support staff. No physicians, mental health professionals or nursing positions are on the list. However, it does include 12,622 pharmacists and 5,975 pharmacy technicians. 

The VA worked in accordance with the White House and Office of Personnel Management to develop the updated guidance, Acting Veterans Affairs Secretary Todd Hunter said. In a Jan. 21 memo, Hunter wrote: "Positions critical to delivering care to veterans in the Veteran[s] Health Administration ... are exempted under the category of public safety.”

According to Hunter's memo, no other vacancies that existed as of midday Monday will be filled. Candidates who received job offers before noon on Jan. 20 and have a start date on or before Feb. 8 will be onboarded, while those with a start date after Feb. 8—or one that is undetermined—will have their offers rescinded.

The first Trump Administration began the same way in 2017, initiating a freeze on Federal hiring and receiving a similar response from the VA. In 2017, the hiring of doctors and nurses continued while that freeze was in effect, but onboarding of new support and administrative staff was not. Then-Secretary of Veterans Affairs Dr. David J. Shulkin said, “VA is committed to serving veterans, but at the same time improving efficiency and reducing bureaucracy.” 

The current Executive Order states it “shall not adversely impact veterans’ benefits and does not apply to positions related to public safety” (or military personnel, immigration enforcement, and national security). It also says it does not adversely impact the provision of Social Security, Medicare, or Veterans’ benefits. 

“Under President Trump’s leadership, VA will always do what is necessary to provide America’s Veterans with the benefits and services they have earned. The targeted hiring-freeze exemptions announced today underscore that fact,” said VA Director of Media Affairs Morgan Ackley.  

Some in Congress feel the VA should be doing more, though, and are pushing for an exemption of all VA employees. On Friday, Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee Ranking Member Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) released a statement on the exemptions. “The latest Administration hiring freeze announcement still falls short. While I’m encouraged the President responded to our concerns by exempting certain VA personnel, only a clear, unequivocal statement to exempt all VA employees from the hiring freeze will reassure me—and veterans—they will receive the care and benefits they need and deserve. The exemptions listed yesterday provide more questions than answers and fail to include key personnel, including Veterans Benefits Administration employees. The Trump Administration is going to try to confuse the issue with a lot of vague assurances. We need a clear commitment every VA employee is exempt—effective immediately. Moreover, the Trump Administration must address the offers it has already rescinded that are now exempt.”

Blumenthal and 24 Democratic Senators also signed a letter to that effect, stressing concerns about the negative impact the hiring freeze will have on the delivery of veterans’ health care and benefits nationwide “if not quickly reversed.” Blumenthal also pressed Doug Collins (R-GA), Trump’s nominee for VA Secretary, to push back against a hiring freeze at VA, if his nomination is confirmed: “This is going to be a first test of your leadership.”

“We’ll take a look at the current levels of employees that we have and where they’re properly located,” Collins said, adding that he was “still examining” the freeze’s impact on the VA. “We will work under the Executive Order [Trump] has given us.” 

Blumenthal argued that the new exemptions exclude a number of critical positions at VA. Among them include all positions at the Veterans Benefits Administration and National Cemetery Administration, which provide veterans’ claims processing, survivor benefits, GI Bill education benefits, and burial scheduling and operations; many nonclinical positions critical to VA hospital functioning, including patient advocates, food service workers, and chaplains; and positions relating to construction project management for new hospitals and clinics, new nursing homes, new cemetery construction, leases, and repairs to existing VA facilities.

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has outlined > 300,000 exemptions to the federal hiring freeze to fill essential benefits and health positions. The exempted positions are primarily medical support staff. While the exemptions include pharmacists, physicians and nurses were not included. The day after taking office for the second time, President Trump signed an Executive Order implementing a “freeze on the hiring of Federal civilian employees, to be applied throughout the executive branch” but left many of the details to individual agencies.

Set to last 90 days, the hiring freeze forced Federal agencies to develop plans to reduce the size of their workforces through efficiencies and attrition, Trump said. These agencies would also not be able to hire contractors.

Three days later, however, the VA responded “Following successful implementation of President Trump’s federal hiring freeze, the Department of Veterans Affairs announced several exemptions to the policy. These exemptions clarify the department’s ability to continue filling essential positions that provide health care and other vital services to Veterans and VA beneficiaries.”

This allowed > 304,000 jobs to be exempt from the freeze. Almost 92% of the VA’s 450,000 employees work in health care and health administration and support services. Most of the exemptions involve support staff. No physicians, mental health professionals or nursing positions are on the list. However, it does include 12,622 pharmacists and 5,975 pharmacy technicians. 

The VA worked in accordance with the White House and Office of Personnel Management to develop the updated guidance, Acting Veterans Affairs Secretary Todd Hunter said. In a Jan. 21 memo, Hunter wrote: "Positions critical to delivering care to veterans in the Veteran[s] Health Administration ... are exempted under the category of public safety.”

According to Hunter's memo, no other vacancies that existed as of midday Monday will be filled. Candidates who received job offers before noon on Jan. 20 and have a start date on or before Feb. 8 will be onboarded, while those with a start date after Feb. 8—or one that is undetermined—will have their offers rescinded.

The first Trump Administration began the same way in 2017, initiating a freeze on Federal hiring and receiving a similar response from the VA. In 2017, the hiring of doctors and nurses continued while that freeze was in effect, but onboarding of new support and administrative staff was not. Then-Secretary of Veterans Affairs Dr. David J. Shulkin said, “VA is committed to serving veterans, but at the same time improving efficiency and reducing bureaucracy.” 

The current Executive Order states it “shall not adversely impact veterans’ benefits and does not apply to positions related to public safety” (or military personnel, immigration enforcement, and national security). It also says it does not adversely impact the provision of Social Security, Medicare, or Veterans’ benefits. 

“Under President Trump’s leadership, VA will always do what is necessary to provide America’s Veterans with the benefits and services they have earned. The targeted hiring-freeze exemptions announced today underscore that fact,” said VA Director of Media Affairs Morgan Ackley.  

Some in Congress feel the VA should be doing more, though, and are pushing for an exemption of all VA employees. On Friday, Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee Ranking Member Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) released a statement on the exemptions. “The latest Administration hiring freeze announcement still falls short. While I’m encouraged the President responded to our concerns by exempting certain VA personnel, only a clear, unequivocal statement to exempt all VA employees from the hiring freeze will reassure me—and veterans—they will receive the care and benefits they need and deserve. The exemptions listed yesterday provide more questions than answers and fail to include key personnel, including Veterans Benefits Administration employees. The Trump Administration is going to try to confuse the issue with a lot of vague assurances. We need a clear commitment every VA employee is exempt—effective immediately. Moreover, the Trump Administration must address the offers it has already rescinded that are now exempt.”

Blumenthal and 24 Democratic Senators also signed a letter to that effect, stressing concerns about the negative impact the hiring freeze will have on the delivery of veterans’ health care and benefits nationwide “if not quickly reversed.” Blumenthal also pressed Doug Collins (R-GA), Trump’s nominee for VA Secretary, to push back against a hiring freeze at VA, if his nomination is confirmed: “This is going to be a first test of your leadership.”

“We’ll take a look at the current levels of employees that we have and where they’re properly located,” Collins said, adding that he was “still examining” the freeze’s impact on the VA. “We will work under the Executive Order [Trump] has given us.” 

Blumenthal argued that the new exemptions exclude a number of critical positions at VA. Among them include all positions at the Veterans Benefits Administration and National Cemetery Administration, which provide veterans’ claims processing, survivor benefits, GI Bill education benefits, and burial scheduling and operations; many nonclinical positions critical to VA hospital functioning, including patient advocates, food service workers, and chaplains; and positions relating to construction project management for new hospitals and clinics, new nursing homes, new cemetery construction, leases, and repairs to existing VA facilities.

Veterans living in rural areas are often too far away from health care institutions to easily travel to their appointments. Even if they can drive, the cost of gas and other related travel expenses may be too much for some. Telehealth was meant to help relieve that problem, but poor internet access can mitigate its convenience and accessibility for those patients. Two proposals offer solutions. 

In February, Sens. Jon Ossoff (D-GA), Susan Collins (R-ME), and John Thune (R-SD) introduced the Rural Veterans Transportation to Care Act, a bill that would expand eligibility to the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Highly Rural Transportation Grants, a program currently only available to counties with < 7 people per square mile.

“As I’ve sat down with veterans in rural areas across Georgia, one of their key concerns is lack of transportation,” Sen. Ossoff said. “That’s why I’m introducing this bipartisan bill to ensure veterans have more access to transportation services that can bring them to VA clinics and medical centers to get the care they need.”

Amanda Flener and her husband, John, a veteran wounded while serving in Iraq, were driving as long as 3 hours from Fitzgerald, Georgia (population 8900) to attend his medical appointments. In the last 2 years, Flener told the Daily Yonder she had put nearly 72,000 miles on her vehicle. Following hurricane Helene, she said, "We had been driving 30 miles just to get gas to power our generator … and we were fortunate to be able to do that.” 

Telehealth appointments can help fill coverage gaps, Flener said. But even while paying for the most expensive internet plan available in her county, the signal isn't always strong enough. Telehealth care is "progress, for sure," Flener said. "So, we pay for the best Wi-Fi we can get in our area, but it isn't always reliable enough to take the video calls from the VA." 

As a result, veterans and their caregivers could benefit not only from the bipartisan transportation proposal, but also from a decision announced in November. The VA is proposing to eliminate copayments for all VA telehealth services and establish a grant program to fund designated VA telehealth access points in non-VA facilities, with a focus on rural and medically underserved communities.

The program, called Accessing Telehealth through Local Area Stations (ATLAS), would provide funding to organizations — including nonprofits and private businesses — to offer veterans comfortable, private spaces equipped with high-speed internet access and the technology to remotely meet with VA clinicians. Grants would also provide designated funding to train on-site personnel to support the program.

These proposed changes would advance the VA’s and the Biden-Harris Administration’s ongoing efforts to lower costs and expand access to care for veterans. They also could make a life-changing difference for the 2.7 million rural veterans enrolled in VA health care.

According to a 2024 RAND study, just under half of military and veteran caregivers live in a county without a VA facility, and nearly half live in a primary care physician shortage area. For military/veteran caregivers in particular, the survey found, reduced access to support related to the more complicated care some patients require, greater distances to reach opportunities (eg, retail, economic, or social), and even differences in Wi-Fi/broadband internet access may create “unique needs.” The survey found that 24% of rural military/veteran caregivers did not have reliable broadband internet. 

“Waiving copays for telehealth services and launching this grant program are both major steps forward in ensuring veterans can access health care where and when they need it,” said VA Secretary Denis McDonough. “VA is the best and most affordable care in America for veterans — with these steps, we can make it easier for veterans to access their earned VA health care.”

 The rulemaking can be viewed in the Federal Register under public inspection, and is open for comment. The VA anticipates a notice of funding opportunity for this grant program following publication of the final rule.

Veterans living in rural areas are often too far away from health care institutions to easily travel to their appointments. Even if they can drive, the cost of gas and other related travel expenses may be too much for some. Telehealth was meant to help relieve that problem, but poor internet access can mitigate its convenience and accessibility for those patients. Two proposals offer solutions. 

In February, Sens. Jon Ossoff (D-GA), Susan Collins (R-ME), and John Thune (R-SD) introduced the Rural Veterans Transportation to Care Act, a bill that would expand eligibility to the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Highly Rural Transportation Grants, a program currently only available to counties with < 7 people per square mile.

“As I’ve sat down with veterans in rural areas across Georgia, one of their key concerns is lack of transportation,” Sen. Ossoff said. “That’s why I’m introducing this bipartisan bill to ensure veterans have more access to transportation services that can bring them to VA clinics and medical centers to get the care they need.”

Amanda Flener and her husband, John, a veteran wounded while serving in Iraq, were driving as long as 3 hours from Fitzgerald, Georgia (population 8900) to attend his medical appointments. In the last 2 years, Flener told the Daily Yonder she had put nearly 72,000 miles on her vehicle. Following hurricane Helene, she said, "We had been driving 30 miles just to get gas to power our generator … and we were fortunate to be able to do that.” 

Telehealth appointments can help fill coverage gaps, Flener said. But even while paying for the most expensive internet plan available in her county, the signal isn't always strong enough. Telehealth care is "progress, for sure," Flener said. "So, we pay for the best Wi-Fi we can get in our area, but it isn't always reliable enough to take the video calls from the VA." 

As a result, veterans and their caregivers could benefit not only from the bipartisan transportation proposal, but also from a decision announced in November. The VA is proposing to eliminate copayments for all VA telehealth services and establish a grant program to fund designated VA telehealth access points in non-VA facilities, with a focus on rural and medically underserved communities.

The program, called Accessing Telehealth through Local Area Stations (ATLAS), would provide funding to organizations — including nonprofits and private businesses — to offer veterans comfortable, private spaces equipped with high-speed internet access and the technology to remotely meet with VA clinicians. Grants would also provide designated funding to train on-site personnel to support the program.

These proposed changes would advance the VA’s and the Biden-Harris Administration’s ongoing efforts to lower costs and expand access to care for veterans. They also could make a life-changing difference for the 2.7 million rural veterans enrolled in VA health care.

According to a 2024 RAND study, just under half of military and veteran caregivers live in a county without a VA facility, and nearly half live in a primary care physician shortage area. For military/veteran caregivers in particular, the survey found, reduced access to support related to the more complicated care some patients require, greater distances to reach opportunities (eg, retail, economic, or social), and even differences in Wi-Fi/broadband internet access may create “unique needs.” The survey found that 24% of rural military/veteran caregivers did not have reliable broadband internet. 

“Waiving copays for telehealth services and launching this grant program are both major steps forward in ensuring veterans can access health care where and when they need it,” said VA Secretary Denis McDonough. “VA is the best and most affordable care in America for veterans — with these steps, we can make it easier for veterans to access their earned VA health care.”

 The rulemaking can be viewed in the Federal Register under public inspection, and is open for comment. The VA anticipates a notice of funding opportunity for this grant program following publication of the final rule.

Veterans living in rural areas are often too far away from health care institutions to easily travel to their appointments. Even if they can drive, the cost of gas and other related travel expenses may be too much for some. Telehealth was meant to help relieve that problem, but poor internet access can mitigate its convenience and accessibility for those patients. Two proposals offer solutions. 

In February, Sens. Jon Ossoff (D-GA), Susan Collins (R-ME), and John Thune (R-SD) introduced the Rural Veterans Transportation to Care Act, a bill that would expand eligibility to the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Highly Rural Transportation Grants, a program currently only available to counties with < 7 people per square mile.

“As I’ve sat down with veterans in rural areas across Georgia, one of their key concerns is lack of transportation,” Sen. Ossoff said. “That’s why I’m introducing this bipartisan bill to ensure veterans have more access to transportation services that can bring them to VA clinics and medical centers to get the care they need.”

Amanda Flener and her husband, John, a veteran wounded while serving in Iraq, were driving as long as 3 hours from Fitzgerald, Georgia (population 8900) to attend his medical appointments. In the last 2 years, Flener told the Daily Yonder she had put nearly 72,000 miles on her vehicle. Following hurricane Helene, she said, "We had been driving 30 miles just to get gas to power our generator … and we were fortunate to be able to do that.” 

Telehealth appointments can help fill coverage gaps, Flener said. But even while paying for the most expensive internet plan available in her county, the signal isn't always strong enough. Telehealth care is "progress, for sure," Flener said. "So, we pay for the best Wi-Fi we can get in our area, but it isn't always reliable enough to take the video calls from the VA." 

As a result, veterans and their caregivers could benefit not only from the bipartisan transportation proposal, but also from a decision announced in November. The VA is proposing to eliminate copayments for all VA telehealth services and establish a grant program to fund designated VA telehealth access points in non-VA facilities, with a focus on rural and medically underserved communities.

The program, called Accessing Telehealth through Local Area Stations (ATLAS), would provide funding to organizations — including nonprofits and private businesses — to offer veterans comfortable, private spaces equipped with high-speed internet access and the technology to remotely meet with VA clinicians. Grants would also provide designated funding to train on-site personnel to support the program.

These proposed changes would advance the VA’s and the Biden-Harris Administration’s ongoing efforts to lower costs and expand access to care for veterans. They also could make a life-changing difference for the 2.7 million rural veterans enrolled in VA health care.

According to a 2024 RAND study, just under half of military and veteran caregivers live in a county without a VA facility, and nearly half live in a primary care physician shortage area. For military/veteran caregivers in particular, the survey found, reduced access to support related to the more complicated care some patients require, greater distances to reach opportunities (eg, retail, economic, or social), and even differences in Wi-Fi/broadband internet access may create “unique needs.” The survey found that 24% of rural military/veteran caregivers did not have reliable broadband internet. 

“Waiving copays for telehealth services and launching this grant program are both major steps forward in ensuring veterans can access health care where and when they need it,” said VA Secretary Denis McDonough. “VA is the best and most affordable care in America for veterans — with these steps, we can make it easier for veterans to access their earned VA health care.”

 The rulemaking can be viewed in the Federal Register under public inspection, and is open for comment. The VA anticipates a notice of funding opportunity for this grant program following publication of the final rule.

We have a tradition at Federal Practitioner where the December editorial usually features some version of the “best and worst” of the last 12 months in government health care. As we close out a difficult year, instead I offer a cautionary yet promising story that epitomizes both risk and benefit.

In some quarters, 2024 has been the year of AI (artificial intelligence).² While in science fiction, superhuman machines, like the Terminator, are often associated with apocalyptic threats, we often forget the positive models of human-technology interaction, such as the protective robot in Lost in Space. While AI is not yet as advanced as what has already been depicted on the screen, it is inextricably interwoven into the daily fabric of our lives. Almost any website you go to for business or pleasure has a chatbot waiting to help (or frustrate) you. Most of us have Alexa, Siri, or another digital assistant organizing our homes and schedules. When I Google “everyday uses of artificial intelligence,” it is AI that responds with an overview.

Medicine is not immune. Renowned physician and scientist Eric Topol, MD, suggests that AI represents a “fourth industrial revolution in medicine” that can dramatically improve health care.³ The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has been at the forefront of this new space.⁴ The story recounted below encapsulates the enormous benefits AI can bring to health care and the vigilance we must exercise to anticipate and mitigate risk for this to be an overall positive transition.

The story begins with a key element of AI change—the machine learning predictive algorithm. In this case, the algorithm was designed to predict—and thereby prevent—the top public health priority in federal practice: suicide. The Recovery Engagement and Coordination for Health-Veterans Enhanced Treatment (REACH VET) program was launched in 2017 to assist in identifying the top 0.1% of veterans at the highest risk for suicide.⁵

At least at this stage of AI in medicine, the safest and most ethical efforts come from collaborations between health care professionals and AI developers that maximize the very different strengths of each partner. REACH VET is an exemplar of this kind of teamwork. Once the algorithm analyzes > 60 variables to identify veterans at high risk for suicide, data are communicated to a REACH VET program coordinator, who then notifies the practitioner responsible for the veteran’s care so they can put into action evidence-based suicide prevention strategies.⁵

VA researchers in 2021 published a study of 173,313 veterans comparing outcomes before and after entry into the program using a triple differences design. Veterans participating in the program reported an increase in outpatient visits and documentation of safety plans, and a decrease in emergency department visits, inpatient mental health admissions, and recorded suicide attempts.⁶

A US Government Accounting Office analysis found that “REACH VET had identified veterans who had not been identified through other methods.”⁷ This was not just an example of AI hype: as a relatively rare and statistically complicated phenomenon, suicide is notoriously difficult to predict and model. Machine learning algorithms like REACH VET have unprecedented potential to assist and augment suicide prevention.⁸

In 2023, veteran service organizations and journalists raised concerns that the AI algorithm was biased and ignored critical risk factors that put some veterans at increased risk. Based on their analysis, they claimed that the algorithm did not account for risk factors uniquely associated with women veterans, namely military sexual trauma and intimate partner violence.⁹ Women are the most rapidly growing VA population, yet too often they encounter health care disparities, harassment, and stigmatization when seeking care. The Congressional Veterans Affairs committees investigated and introduced legislation to update the algorithm.¹⁰

VA experts dispute these claims, and a computer science PhD may be required to understand the debate. But as the history of medicine has shown us, every treatment and procedure has benefits and risks. No matter how bright and shiny the technology initially appears, a soft scientific underbelly emerges sooner or later. Just as with REACH VET, algorithm bias is often discovered during deployment when the logic of the laboratory encounters the unpredictable variety of humankind.¹¹ Frequently, those problems are—as with REACH VET— not solely or even primarily technical ones. The data mirror society and reflect its biases.

For learning organizations like the VA and the US Department of Defense (DoD), the criticisms of REACH VET signal the need to engage in continuous performance improvement. AI requires the human trainers and supervisors who teach the machines to continuously revise and update their lesson plans. The most recent VA data show that in 2021, 6392 veterans died by suicide.¹² In Congressional testimony, VA leaders reported that as of May 2024, REACH VET was operating in 28 VA facilities and had identified 6700 high-risk veterans.13 REACH VET can save veteran’s lives, which is the sine qua non for our federal health care systems.

The algorithm should be improved to identify ALL veterans so they receive lifesaving interventions. Every veteran’s life is sacred; the algorithm that may prevent suicide must be continuously improved. That is why our representatives did not propose to ban REACH VET or enforce an AI winter on the VA and DoD. Instead, they called for an update to the algorithm, underscoring the value of machine learning for suicide prediction and prevention.

The epigraph from one of the top AI ethicists and scientists in the world makes the point that AI is not the moral agent here: it is fallible humans who must keep learning along with machines. That is why, at the end of 2024, VA experts are revising the algorithm so REACH VET can help prevent even more veteran suicides in 2025 and beyond.¹⁴

We have a tradition at Federal Practitioner where the December editorial usually features some version of the “best and worst” of the last 12 months in government health care. As we close out a difficult year, instead I offer a cautionary yet promising story that epitomizes both risk and benefit.

In some quarters, 2024 has been the year of AI (artificial intelligence).² While in science fiction, superhuman machines, like the Terminator, are often associated with apocalyptic threats, we often forget the positive models of human-technology interaction, such as the protective robot in Lost in Space. While AI is not yet as advanced as what has already been depicted on the screen, it is inextricably interwoven into the daily fabric of our lives. Almost any website you go to for business or pleasure has a chatbot waiting to help (or frustrate) you. Most of us have Alexa, Siri, or another digital assistant organizing our homes and schedules. When I Google “everyday uses of artificial intelligence,” it is AI that responds with an overview.

Medicine is not immune. Renowned physician and scientist Eric Topol, MD, suggests that AI represents a “fourth industrial revolution in medicine” that can dramatically improve health care.³ The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has been at the forefront of this new space.⁴ The story recounted below encapsulates the enormous benefits AI can bring to health care and the vigilance we must exercise to anticipate and mitigate risk for this to be an overall positive transition.

The story begins with a key element of AI change—the machine learning predictive algorithm. In this case, the algorithm was designed to predict—and thereby prevent—the top public health priority in federal practice: suicide. The Recovery Engagement and Coordination for Health-Veterans Enhanced Treatment (REACH VET) program was launched in 2017 to assist in identifying the top 0.1% of veterans at the highest risk for suicide.⁵

At least at this stage of AI in medicine, the safest and most ethical efforts come from collaborations between health care professionals and AI developers that maximize the very different strengths of each partner. REACH VET is an exemplar of this kind of teamwork. Once the algorithm analyzes > 60 variables to identify veterans at high risk for suicide, data are communicated to a REACH VET program coordinator, who then notifies the practitioner responsible for the veteran’s care so they can put into action evidence-based suicide prevention strategies.⁵

VA researchers in 2021 published a study of 173,313 veterans comparing outcomes before and after entry into the program using a triple differences design. Veterans participating in the program reported an increase in outpatient visits and documentation of safety plans, and a decrease in emergency department visits, inpatient mental health admissions, and recorded suicide attempts.⁶

A US Government Accounting Office analysis found that “REACH VET had identified veterans who had not been identified through other methods.”⁷ This was not just an example of AI hype: as a relatively rare and statistically complicated phenomenon, suicide is notoriously difficult to predict and model. Machine learning algorithms like REACH VET have unprecedented potential to assist and augment suicide prevention.⁸

In 2023, veteran service organizations and journalists raised concerns that the AI algorithm was biased and ignored critical risk factors that put some veterans at increased risk. Based on their analysis, they claimed that the algorithm did not account for risk factors uniquely associated with women veterans, namely military sexual trauma and intimate partner violence.⁹ Women are the most rapidly growing VA population, yet too often they encounter health care disparities, harassment, and stigmatization when seeking care. The Congressional Veterans Affairs committees investigated and introduced legislation to update the algorithm.¹⁰

VA experts dispute these claims, and a computer science PhD may be required to understand the debate. But as the history of medicine has shown us, every treatment and procedure has benefits and risks. No matter how bright and shiny the technology initially appears, a soft scientific underbelly emerges sooner or later. Just as with REACH VET, algorithm bias is often discovered during deployment when the logic of the laboratory encounters the unpredictable variety of humankind.¹¹ Frequently, those problems are—as with REACH VET— not solely or even primarily technical ones. The data mirror society and reflect its biases.

For learning organizations like the VA and the US Department of Defense (DoD), the criticisms of REACH VET signal the need to engage in continuous performance improvement. AI requires the human trainers and supervisors who teach the machines to continuously revise and update their lesson plans. The most recent VA data show that in 2021, 6392 veterans died by suicide.¹² In Congressional testimony, VA leaders reported that as of May 2024, REACH VET was operating in 28 VA facilities and had identified 6700 high-risk veterans.13 REACH VET can save veteran’s lives, which is the sine qua non for our federal health care systems.

The algorithm should be improved to identify ALL veterans so they receive lifesaving interventions. Every veteran’s life is sacred; the algorithm that may prevent suicide must be continuously improved. That is why our representatives did not propose to ban REACH VET or enforce an AI winter on the VA and DoD. Instead, they called for an update to the algorithm, underscoring the value of machine learning for suicide prediction and prevention.

The epigraph from one of the top AI ethicists and scientists in the world makes the point that AI is not the moral agent here: it is fallible humans who must keep learning along with machines. That is why, at the end of 2024, VA experts are revising the algorithm so REACH VET can help prevent even more veteran suicides in 2025 and beyond.¹⁴

We have a tradition at Federal Practitioner where the December editorial usually features some version of the “best and worst” of the last 12 months in government health care. As we close out a difficult year, instead I offer a cautionary yet promising story that epitomizes both risk and benefit.

In some quarters, 2024 has been the year of AI (artificial intelligence).² While in science fiction, superhuman machines, like the Terminator, are often associated with apocalyptic threats, we often forget the positive models of human-technology interaction, such as the protective robot in Lost in Space. While AI is not yet as advanced as what has already been depicted on the screen, it is inextricably interwoven into the daily fabric of our lives. Almost any website you go to for business or pleasure has a chatbot waiting to help (or frustrate) you. Most of us have Alexa, Siri, or another digital assistant organizing our homes and schedules. When I Google “everyday uses of artificial intelligence,” it is AI that responds with an overview.

Medicine is not immune. Renowned physician and scientist Eric Topol, MD, suggests that AI represents a “fourth industrial revolution in medicine” that can dramatically improve health care.³ The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has been at the forefront of this new space.⁴ The story recounted below encapsulates the enormous benefits AI can bring to health care and the vigilance we must exercise to anticipate and mitigate risk for this to be an overall positive transition.

The story begins with a key element of AI change—the machine learning predictive algorithm. In this case, the algorithm was designed to predict—and thereby prevent—the top public health priority in federal practice: suicide. The Recovery Engagement and Coordination for Health-Veterans Enhanced Treatment (REACH VET) program was launched in 2017 to assist in identifying the top 0.1% of veterans at the highest risk for suicide.⁵

At least at this stage of AI in medicine, the safest and most ethical efforts come from collaborations between health care professionals and AI developers that maximize the very different strengths of each partner. REACH VET is an exemplar of this kind of teamwork. Once the algorithm analyzes > 60 variables to identify veterans at high risk for suicide, data are communicated to a REACH VET program coordinator, who then notifies the practitioner responsible for the veteran’s care so they can put into action evidence-based suicide prevention strategies.⁵

VA researchers in 2021 published a study of 173,313 veterans comparing outcomes before and after entry into the program using a triple differences design. Veterans participating in the program reported an increase in outpatient visits and documentation of safety plans, and a decrease in emergency department visits, inpatient mental health admissions, and recorded suicide attempts.⁶

A US Government Accounting Office analysis found that “REACH VET had identified veterans who had not been identified through other methods.”⁷ This was not just an example of AI hype: as a relatively rare and statistically complicated phenomenon, suicide is notoriously difficult to predict and model. Machine learning algorithms like REACH VET have unprecedented potential to assist and augment suicide prevention.⁸

In 2023, veteran service organizations and journalists raised concerns that the AI algorithm was biased and ignored critical risk factors that put some veterans at increased risk. Based on their analysis, they claimed that the algorithm did not account for risk factors uniquely associated with women veterans, namely military sexual trauma and intimate partner violence.⁹ Women are the most rapidly growing VA population, yet too often they encounter health care disparities, harassment, and stigmatization when seeking care. The Congressional Veterans Affairs committees investigated and introduced legislation to update the algorithm.¹⁰

VA experts dispute these claims, and a computer science PhD may be required to understand the debate. But as the history of medicine has shown us, every treatment and procedure has benefits and risks. No matter how bright and shiny the technology initially appears, a soft scientific underbelly emerges sooner or later. Just as with REACH VET, algorithm bias is often discovered during deployment when the logic of the laboratory encounters the unpredictable variety of humankind.¹¹ Frequently, those problems are—as with REACH VET— not solely or even primarily technical ones. The data mirror society and reflect its biases.

For learning organizations like the VA and the US Department of Defense (DoD), the criticisms of REACH VET signal the need to engage in continuous performance improvement. AI requires the human trainers and supervisors who teach the machines to continuously revise and update their lesson plans. The most recent VA data show that in 2021, 6392 veterans died by suicide.¹² In Congressional testimony, VA leaders reported that as of May 2024, REACH VET was operating in 28 VA facilities and had identified 6700 high-risk veterans.13 REACH VET can save veteran’s lives, which is the sine qua non for our federal health care systems.

The algorithm should be improved to identify ALL veterans so they receive lifesaving interventions. Every veteran’s life is sacred; the algorithm that may prevent suicide must be continuously improved. That is why our representatives did not propose to ban REACH VET or enforce an AI winter on the VA and DoD. Instead, they called for an update to the algorithm, underscoring the value of machine learning for suicide prediction and prevention.

The epigraph from one of the top AI ethicists and scientists in the world makes the point that AI is not the moral agent here: it is fallible humans who must keep learning along with machines. That is why, at the end of 2024, VA experts are revising the algorithm so REACH VET can help prevent even more veteran suicides in 2025 and beyond.¹⁴