Rights, Ethics, Advocacy: Securing
Student Mental Health in Indian HEIs
Mrs. VarshaBadwe1*, Mrs. Sonali Sharma2
1 Associate Professor, TMV’s LokmanayTilak Law
College, Tilak Maharashtra Vidyapeeth, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
adv.varshab@gmail.com
2 Assistant Professor, TMV’s LokmanayTilak Law
College, Tilak Maharashtra Vidyapeeth, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
sonalisharma9967@gmail.com
Abstract: A mental disorder involves a noticeable disruption in a person’s thinking, emotional control, or actions. It is typically linked to distress or difficulties in key areas of daily life, such as work, relationships, or personal functioning. There are various forms of mental disorders, which are also commonly known as mental health conditions.Indian higher education system is loaded with academic and social distress wherein the institutions are facing a serious mental health crisis, with student suicides and psychological distress steadily rising over the last decade. This issue brings forward critical concerns about the extent to which universities acknowledge and safeguard students’ rights, address ethical challenges in providing mental health support, and either promote or limit advocacy related to mental well-being on campus. The paper explores ways to ensure student mental health in Indian universities through an approach grounded in rights and ethical principles, with particular emphasis on legal frameworks, policy measures, and institutional practices. The paper is structured around three main themes. Initially, it explores the legal rights of students to mental health care and dignity under the Constitution of India (especially Article 21) and the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, including rights to access care, non-discrimination, confidentiality, and informed consent. It also considers how UGC guidelines and related policies on mental health and holistic well-being in higher education translate these rights into obligations for universities. Vitally, it analyses key ethical issues that arise in university mental health systems, such as breaches of confidentiality, lack of informed consent, discriminatory attitudes, unequal access to services, and the tension between student autonomy and institutional duty of care. Lastly, it looks at mental health advocacy in universities, including the roles of student groups, faculty, counsellors, administrators, and courts in demanding better services, enforcing existing rights, and building supportive, stigma-free campus cultures.
Research Methodology
This study follows a doctrinal
(library‑based) research methodology, which is commonly used in
legal and policy research. The focus is on understanding and interpreting
existing legal rules, policies, judgments and official data, and then using
them to analyse ethical issues and advocacy possibilities in the context of
student mental health.The study uses a doctrinal legal research
methodology, supported by secondary data. It involves a detailed analysis of
primary legal materials (such as the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, constitutional
provisions, and key judicial decisions including SukdebSaha v. State of
Andhra Pradesh), as well as policy documents issued by bodies like the
University Grants Commission and relevant national education and health
authorities. These are read alongside official reports and academic literature
on student mental health and suicides in India. By combining doctrinal analysis
with ethical reflection, the paper illustrates gaps between law and practice
and proposes concrete, advocacy-oriented recommendationssuch as strengthening
institutional policies, improving faculty training, empowering student-led
initiatives, and enhancing accountability mechanisms. The central argument is
that a rights-based, ethically grounded, and advocacy-driven framework is essential
for creating safe, just, and mentally healthy university environments aligned
with the vision of NEP 2020 and the constitutional guarantee of life with
dignity.
Keywords: Advocacy, HEIs, Mental health ethics,Student rights, UGC guidelines,
INTRODUCTION
Mental
health refers to a state of well-being in which individuals are able to manage
everyday stresses, recognize and use their abilities, perform effectively in
learning and work, and contribute meaningfully to society. It holds both
inherent importance and practical value, and is widely recognized as a
fundamental human right.Rather than being a fixed condition, mental health
exists along a dynamic continuum, varying from person to person and across
different stages of life. At any given time, it is shaped by a combination of
individual, familial, community, and structural influences that may either
support or negatively impact well-being. While many individuals demonstrate
resilience in the face of challenges, those exposed to adverse circumstances
are at a greater risk of developing mental health concerns.Several factors can
influence mental health. On an individual level, aspects such as emotional
regulation skills, genetic predisposition, and substance use may increase
vulnerability. In addition, broader social and environmental conditions,
exposure to violence, inequality, and lack of access to basic resourcescan
significantly heighten the likelihood of mental health difficulties.
Mental health has become a central concern in Indian higher education.
University and college students often face intense pressure from competitive
entrance exams, continuous assessments, fears about employment, family
expectations and adjustment to hostel or city life. Many of them also struggle
with loneliness, bullying, relationship issues, financial stress or
discrimination. When these problems accumulate and there is no timely support,
they can lead to anxiety, depression, self‑harm or even suicide.
Recent data and media reports show that student suicides have increased
sharply over the last decade. This pattern suggests that the mental health
systems in universities and colleges are not adequate for the scale and
seriousness of the problem. At the same time, India has adopted a modern,
rights‑based legal framework for mental health through the Mental
Healthcare Act, 2017 (MHCA), and has committed to holistic education and well‑being
through the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. The University Grants
Commission (UGC) has also begun issuing guidelines on mental health and well‑being
in higher education institutions (HEIs).
The concern here arises is areIndian HEIs actually instrumental in
protecting students’ mental health rights and responding ethically to students’
needs.The study highlights the rising concern of the student’s mental health
and the accountability of the HEI’s, in light of Constitutional recommendation,
MHCA 2017 and UGC policies.
Students’ Mental Health Rights in Indian HEIs
are devised under
Constitutional Basis: Article 21 and Dignity
Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees the right to life and personal
liberty. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that this right includes the
right to live with dignity, which covers physical and mental well‑being.
Over time, the Hon’ble SupremeCourt has linked the right to health to
Article 21, and more recently, it has also recognised mental
health as part of this broader guaranteein the case of SukdebSaha v. State of Andhra
Pradesh. This case arose after the death of a 17-year-old NEET aspirant in
Visakhapatnam. Due to discrepancies in the police investigation and conflicting
medical and institutional reports, the Court directed the Central Bureau of
Investigation (CBI) to take charge of the inquiry. Furthermore, the judgment
established a rights-centered framework aimed at addressing mental health
challenges faced by students in India. The judgment stressed
that institutions, including educational institutions, cannot ignore mental
health and must take positive steps to protect students from harm. This
constitutional lens is crucial: it means that mental health support is not
charity; it is part of the fundamental right to life with dignity.The Court issued wide-ranging
directives aimed at strengthening mental health support within educational
institutions. It mandated that all institutions formulate and implement a
standardized mental health policy, which must be reviewed annually and aligned
with national initiatives such as UMMEED, MANODARPAN, and the National Suicide
Prevention Strategy. Additionally, institutions with a student strength of 100
or more are required to engage trained mental health professionals, including
counsellors, psychologists, or social workers specializing in child and
adolescent care.
Importantly,
the Court prohibited harmful practices such as academic shaming and segregation
of students based on performance, which are often prevalent in coaching
environments. It also required institutions to establish clear, written
procedures for referring students to mental health services, hospitals, and
suicide prevention helplines. To enhance accessibility to support, helpline
detailssuch as Tele-MANASmust be visibly displayed in key areas like
classrooms, hostels, and common spaces.
Statutory Rights under the Mental Healthcare
Act, 2017
The
enactment of the MHCA was a direct response to India’s international
obligations, particularly its ratification of the Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) in 2007.This
legislative intent signals a clear departure from the previous custodial and
medical models towards a rights-based, person centered approach.
Rights of
Persons with Mental Illness (Chapter V):Chapter V of the Mental Healthcare Act
(MHCA) forms a crucial part of the legislation by clearly outlining a wide
range of rights available to individuals with mental illness. It seeks to
ensure dignity, autonomy, and equal treatment in all aspects of mental
healthcare.
Right to
Access Mental Healthcare (Section 18):This provision guarantees that every
individual has the right to obtain mental health services provided or funded by
the government. It emphasizes that such services should be affordable, easily
available, and of adequate quality, thereby promoting broader and more
equitable access to mental healthcare.
Right to
Community Living (Section 19):Under this section, individuals with mental
illness have the right to live within the community and not be isolated or
institutionalized unnecessarily. It supports integration into society through
community-based care and rehabilitation, rather than segregation.
Right to
Protection from Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading Treatment (Section 20):This
provision safeguards individuals against any form of abuse or harsh treatment.
Practices such as unnecessary physical restraints, solitary confinement, or
forced medical intervention are strictly restricted and allowed only under
regulated conditions.
Right to
Equality and Non-discrimination (Section 21):The Act ensures that no person
with mental illness is treated unfairly on grounds such as gender, caste,
religion, sexual orientation, or social status. It reinforces the principle
that all individuals deserve equal protection and opportunities.
Individuals are entitled to receive clear and understandable information regarding
their mental health condition and treatment. At the same time, their personal
mental health data must be kept confidential and protected from unauthorized
disclosure.
Right to
Access Medical Records (Section 25) and Personal Contacts (Section 26):These
provisions empower individuals by allowing them to review their medical records
and maintain communication with family, friends, and others. This helps
preserve their independence and social connections.
Right to
Legal Aid (Section 27):The Act also guarantees access to legal assistance,
ensuring that persons with mental illness can seek support in protecting and
enforcing their rights under the law.
UGC Guidelines and Institutional Duties
The UGC, as the
regulator of higher education, has issued guidelines and draft policies
encouraging HEIs to:
The
University Grants Commission (UGC) guidelines on the safety of students in
higher educational institutions emphasize that a secure and supportive
environment is fundamental for effective learning, personal growth, and overall
well-being. These guidelines aim to create a comprehensive safety framework
that protects students from physical, psychological, and social risks both on
and off campus. Institutions are encouraged to adopt well-defined policies, robust
infrastructure, and proactive practices to ensure that students feel safe,
respected, and supported at all times.
To ensure
safety within campuses, institutions must establish strong physical security
systems, including boundary walls, controlled entry and exit points,
surveillance through CCTV cameras, and proper identity verification mechanisms.
The deployment of trained security personnel, including female staff, is
essential to maintain discipline and ensure respectful security checks.
Additionally, the use of biometric attendance systems and mandatory identity
cards helps monitor student movement and prevent unauthorized access, thereby
strengthening campus security.
Emergency
preparedness is another crucial aspect of the guidelines. Institutions are
required to implement efficient communication systems that can quickly alert
students and staff in case of emergencies through messages, calls, or emails.
Clearly defined evacuation procedures and regular mock drills help prevent
panic and ensure a coordinated response during crises. Alongside this, strict
implementation of anti-ragging measures and the display of helpline numbers
across campus create a safer and more accountable environment.
The
guidelines also stress the importance of inclusivity and mental well-being.
Institutions must actively prevent any form of discrimination based on caste,
religion, gender, or social background, thereby fostering a culture of equality
and respect. A structured counseling system should be in place to address students’
emotional, academic, and psychological concerns. Teacher-mentors play a key
role in guiding students, maintaining regular interaction, and communicating
progress or concerns to parents. Regular parent-teacher meetings and accessible
grievance redressal systems further strengthen trust and transparency.Train faculty and staff as
“first responders” who can identify warning signs and refer students to
professional help.
These guidelines attempt to translate the abstract rights in MHCA and
the Constitution into concrete, institutional duties in the higher education
sector. However, their implementation is uneven. Some universities have
advanced systems, while many others have very basic or no formal support
structures. The legislation of Rights of Person with Disability Act 2016recognises
certain mental and psychosocial conditions as disabilities. It requires
educational institutions to provide reasonable accommodation to
students with disabilities, which include Extra time or flexibility in exams, Modified
attendance rules in justified cases and Supportive classroom practices and
counselling, which vitally adds another layer of rights for students whose
mental health conditions qualify as disabilities, and it strengthens the case
for inclusive and supportive policies in HEIs.
Health and
safety provisions are equally important, with institutions required to provide
basic medical facilities and ensure the availability of emergency services such
as ambulances. Fire safety systems, including alarms and extinguishers, must be
installed and regularly tested, while disaster management training and mock
drills should be conducted to prepare students for unforeseen situations.
Awareness programs, workshops, and expert sessions on personal safety, cyber
security, and risk prevention are also encouraged. Additionally, self-defense
training, especially for women students, is recommended to enhance confidence
and personal safety.
Preventing
sexual harassment is a key focus of the guidelines, requiring institutions to
conduct awareness and education programs that promote respectful behavior,
healthy relationships, and active intervention in unsafe situations. Open
discussions, campaigns, and support systems are necessary to build a safe and
respectful campus culture. Furthermore, institutions must ensure proper hygiene
and quality standards in food services to prevent health issues, along with
establishing a clear code of conduct that outlines expected behavior and
disciplinary measures.
The
guidelines also extend to student safety during excursions, tours, and academic
trips. Institutions must carefully plan such activities under the supervision
of trained faculty members, including at least one female teacher. Parental
consent and adequate insurance coverage are mandatory, and students should be
properly briefed about travel plans, safety precautions, and potential risks.
Ensuring medical fitness, safe accommodation, and access to communication
devices are essential measures. Students must also be encouraged to maintain
discipline and stay in contact with their guardians throughout the trip.
One of the most sensitive areas is confidentiality. Students may approach counsellors or trusted
faculty with personal information about their emotions, relationships, trauma
or suicidal thoughts. Ethical practice demands that this information should
remain confidential unless the student gives informed consent for disclosure or
there is an immediate risk of serious harm.
The UGC
guidelines provide a holistic and well-structured approach to student safety by
integrating infrastructure, policy measures, awareness initiatives, and support
systems. When effectively implemented, these measures help create a secure,
inclusive, and nurturing educational environment that not only protects students
but also enables them to thrive academically and personally.Ethically, universities have a duty to create a non‑judgmental
environment where mental health is treated like any other health
issue, and where seeking help is normalised rather than stigmatised.Turning
Rights and Ethics into PracticeAdvocacy is
the process of speaking up and acting to bring about change. In the context of
student mental health in HEIs, advocacy connects legal rights and ethical
duties with concrete reforms.
Key Challenges and Implementation Limitations
Despite the potential of a rights‑based, ethical, and advocacy‑driven
approach, several challenges statically remain:
·
Resource constraints: There is a shortage of
mental health professionals nationwide. Many HEIs cannot easily meet
recommended counsellor‑student ratios.
·
Uneven implementation: Urban, elite
institutions are often far ahead of smaller or rural colleges in implementing
mental health initiatives.
·
Cultural barriers: Stigma, family expectations, and social
norms can make it difficult for students to seek help or for institutions to
openly discuss mental health.
·
Weak enforcement: Legal and policy frameworks for mental
health in HEIs are still evolving. Many guidelines are advisory rather than
mandatory, and enforcement mechanisms are limited.
·
Lack of data: There is insufficient systematic data on
mental health services in HEIs and on the impact of specific interventions,
which makes it harder to design evidence‑based reforms.
·
These challenges mean that progress will be gradual
and will require sustained commitment from multiple actors.
However, the study indicates the below recommendations
·
Strengthen Legal and Policy Frameworks -
Existing laws like
the Mental
Healthcare Act, 2017
should clearly define the role of educational institutions. Regulatory bodies
like the University
Grants Commission
must issue specific guidelines for HEIs.
·
Integrate MHCA and RPWD Principles- Principles of equality, dignity,
and accessibility under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act,
2016 should be
part of accreditation and quality standards. This ensures mental health becomes
an institutional priority.
·
Develop Clear Institutional Policies – Every HEI should have a written
mental health policy covering counselling, confidentiality, consent, and
grievance mechanisms. This ensures clarity and uniformity in handling mental
health issues.
·
Ensure Participatory Policy Making - Policies should be framed with
inputs from students, faculty, counsellors, and legal experts. This makes them
inclusive, practical, and effective.
·
Invest in Services and Capacity Building
- Institutions must
allocate funds for counselling services, awareness programmes, and
infrastructure. Training staff as basic gatekeepers helps in early
identification and support.
·
Promote Student Participation and Peer
Support - Student-led
mental health clubs and peer networks should be encouraged. Their involvement
strengthens outreach and creates a supportive campus environment.
·
Recognize Student Initiatives - Institutions should formally
support and integrate student mental health initiatives into well-being
programmes. This enhances engagement and sustainability.Address Stigma and Build Supportive Culture -Regular
workshops and awareness campaigns should normalise mental health discussions.
Including mental health in orientation and curriculum promotes acceptance.
·
Strengthen Monitoring and Accountability
- HEIs should
establish monitoring committees or ombudspersons for mental health matters. This
ensures proper implementation and oversight.
CONCLUSION
The issue of
student mental health in Indian higher education institutions is no longer
peripheral but central to the discourse on rights, dignity, and institutional
responsibility. As this study demonstrates, mental health is firmly embedded
within the constitutional guarantee of life and personal liberty, as well as
within the statutory framework of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 and related
policy initiatives. However, the mere existence of these legal and ethical
frameworks is insufficient unless they are meaningfully translated into
institutional practice. The persistent gap between normative commitments and
ground realities reflects a deeper structural challenge within the higher education
system.
A
rights-based approach compels institutions to move beyond token measures and
recognize mental health support as a legal obligation rather than discretionary
welfare. Ethical considerations such as confidentiality, informed consent,
non-discrimination, and respect for student autonomy must guide all
interventions. At the same time, advocacy emerges as a crucial bridge that
connects legal entitlements with actual implementation. The active
participation of students, faculty, administrators, and civil society is
essential in fostering a culture that is both supportive and accountable.
Despite
notable progress in policy formulation, challenges such as resource
constraints, social stigma, uneven implementation, and weak enforcement
mechanisms continue to hinder effective outcomes. Addressing these issues
requires a multi-layered strategy involving clearer regulatory mandates,
increased institutional investment, and continuous capacity building. Equally
important is the need to normalize conversations around mental health, thereby
reducing stigma and encouraging help-seeking behavior among students.
Ultimately,
ensuring student mental health in higher education is not solely a matter of
compliance but of commitment to human dignity and social justice. Institutions
must evolve into spaces that not only impart academic knowledge but also
safeguard the holistic well-being of their students. A sustained,
collaborative, and ethically grounded effort can transform campuses into
inclusive environments where every student has the opportunity to thrive, both
mentally and academically.
References
1.
M. (n.d.). Ministery of Education. Retrieved from
https://manodarpan.education.gov.in/
2.
Manodarpan. (n.d.). Minstery of education. Retrieved from
https://manodarpan.education.gov.in/
3.
Mehrotra, S. (n.d.). Indian higher education and youth mental health:
Challenges and opportunities. Retrieved from
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7535075/#R8.
4.
Mental disorders. ( 2025, September 30 ). Retrieved from https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mental-disorders:
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mental-disorders
5.
Som, M. G. (2025, October 24). Beyond Madness Of Marks And Metrics:
Recognition Of Mental Health As A Constitutional Right In India. Retrieved from
https://www.livelaw.in/articles/mental-health-as-constitutional-right-in-india-analysis-307712#:~:text=The%20Court%20apprehend%20that%20teachers,psychological%20integrity%20and%20individual%20autonomy.
6.
Student suicides up 65% in a decade, N. d. (2025, October ). TOI
education. Retrieved from
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/education/news/student-suicides-up-65-in-a-decade-ncrb-data-shows-sharper-rise-than-overall-suicides/articleshow/124248503.cms
7.
Sukdeb Saha v. State of Andhra Pradesh , 2025 SCO.LR7(4) (Supreme court
July 2025).
8.
World Health Organization, Mental Health. ( 2025, October 8). Retrieved
from
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mental-health-strengthening-our-response.