Psychiatry Groups Urge Congress to Replace HHS Secretary Kennedy Jr., Warn of Risks to Care

California psychiatrists and a new national advocacy group are asking Congress to remove Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., saying the department is moving to unwind core federal supports for mental health and addiction care. They argue the consequences would be immediate for patients who rely on Medicaid, for states that depend on federal grants, and for clinicians facing policy shifts they say are at odds with evidence.

The Southern California Psychiatric Society, which represents more than 1,000 clinicians, and the Committee to Protect Public Mental Health, a roughly 50-member group that includes several academic psychiatrists, issued statements this week warning that recent HHS actions increase stigma and restrict access to treatment. Their concerns center on staff firings at the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration earlier this year and indications the department plans to close the agency. HHS has not released a formal plan for that change.

Steven Sharfstein, a former president of the American Psychiatric Association and a founding member of the new committee, said federal investments routed through SAMHSA have helped lower overdose deaths in recent years. He warned that ending the agency would undercut prevention, medication treatment, and community programs that states and local providers use to keep people in care. In his view, removing SAMHSA would destabilize the network of grants, standards, and technical support that states rely on to build and sustain services.

HHS disputes that assessment. In a written response, spokesperson Emily Hilliard said Kennedy is carrying out President Trump’s health agenda by replacing what she called a “failed status quo” with “greater transparency and accountability.” The department did not address whether closing SAMHSA would weaken state and local responses to addiction and serious mental illness or how its functions would be transferred. No transition memo has been released.

Clinicians also criticized HHS’s Make Our Children Healthy Again report, saying it misrepresents research on antidepressants, antipsychotics, stimulants, and other medications. Emily Wood, co-chair of the Southern California Psychiatric Society, said the report downplays the broader scientific literature and supports policies that would curb access to treatments for depression, anxiety disorders, schizophrenia, and ADHD. The groups say that framing fuels fear, discourages treatment, and could lead to limits on services associated in studies with lower suicide risk and better daily functioning. To them, MAHA reads as a retreat from established practice.

Sharfstein added that anticipated Medicaid reductions would fall hardest on people with serious mental illness, including schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Many patients depend on Medicaid for medication, outpatient therapy, and inpatient care. He said cuts are likely to strain clinics and hospitals, reduce capacity, and increase psychiatric crises. Providers already coping with staff shortages and long wait lists would have less room to respond if emergency departments and law enforcement see more psychiatric emergencies.

The committee is asking Congress to replace Kennedy with a leader trained in public health and committed to evidence-based care. Their case echoes a pattern seen in health policy: when federal coordination and funding recede, states and providers often end up with fragmented systems and uneven access. SAMHSA’s block grants, technical assistance, and convening role have helped states set standards and respond to overdoses. Its 988 crisis services have become a first point of contact for many people seeking help.

Key decisions now rest with HHS and lawmakers. The department has not publicly outlined a plan for SAMHSA’s grant programs, technical assistance, 988 crisis services, or overdose response if the agency is closed. It has not said whether it will revise the MAHA report or related policies in response to clinician feedback. Congress could seek clarity through oversight hearings or appropriations language that safeguards core programs while the policy debate proceeds.

Advocates are also watching how any internal restructuring might work. HHS could try to keep SAMHSA’s functions inside another office or disperse them across multiple centers. Moving programs on an organization chart can look orderly, but it can also make navigation harder for states, counties, and local providers that need a single point of contact to keep services running.

The divide is clear: psychiatric leaders see a federal pullback as overdoses and psychiatric needs remain high, while HHS frames its steps as reform aimed at accountability. What Washington decides about SAMHSA’s future and the department’s stance on psychiatric medications will show whether national mental health policy is set by clinical evidence or by a different set of priorities.