Content Warning: This brief discusses mental health struggles and suicide among collegiate student-athletes.

Understanding Athlete Mental Health

Mental health among college athletes has received increasing national attention, as well-known professional athletes such as Simone Biles and Kevin Love have publicly addressed their mental health struggles. The NCAA’s 2022 Student-Athlete Well-Being Study found the number of student-athletes reporting mental health concerns was 1.5 to two times higher than before the COVID-19 pandemic. In this survey of 9,808 student-athletes, however, only 47 percent reported feeling comfortable seeking support from a mental health provider on campus. In 2025, the NCAA’s Student-Athlete Needs, Priorities, and Perspectives (SNAP) survey found that within Division I, 58 percent of female athletes and 30 percent of male athletes believed mental health support should be one of the NCAA’s top priorities. 

California lawmakers have responded to these concerns through Assembly Bill 1985, also known as Sarah Shulze’s Law. The legislation is named after Sarah Shulze, a University of Wisconsin-Madison track and cross country athlete who died by suicide in 2022. Following her death, her family established the Sarah Shulze Foundation to advocate for student-athlete mental health awareness and to reduce the stigma surrounding mental health.

What Would A.B. 1985 Do?

A.B. 1985 seeks to address mental health concerns among collegiate student-athletes by establishing standardized mental health training for coaches. Under current California law, colleges and universities provide mental health resources to students, but there is no statewide requirement that responds specifically to student-athlete mental health concerns. As a result, mental health education regarding coaches’ athletes is largely left to institutions or athletic departments, creating inconsistencies across campuses. 

If enacted, A.B. 1985 would establish and require adherence to statewide standards for institutions that receive state funding by July 1st, 2028. Both paid and volunteer coaches would be required to complete state-approved mental health training every two years. The legislation aims to ensure that coaches can recognize signs of mental health distress and connect athletes with appropriate campus resources. 

Arguments in Favor of A.B. 1985

Supporters of A.B. 1985 assert that coaches are often the adults who spend the most time with student-athletes and may be in the best position to recognize signs of mental health distress. A 2025 U.S. Soccer report found that more than 80 percent of soccer coaches and administrators have encountered athletes or staff facing mental health challenges; yet, less than half had received any mental health training. Proponents of the bill argue that this gap in education may prevent coaches from identifying struggling athletes and connecting them with appropriate resources. Because coaches often interact with athletes more frequently than other mentors, they are well positioned to avoid crises by recognizing the warning signs of mental health concerns and referring students to campus resources. 

Advocates also point to Ohio as a model of effective policies. In 2023, Ohio mandated mental health training for school-based coaches through House Bill 33. After completing Ohio State University’s Coach Beyond Program, coaches reported higher confidence in supporting athletes with mental health concerns. Supporters argue that these results suggest statewide training requirements can improve awareness and preparedness among coaches. 

Some student-athletes have further claimed that student-athletes face unique stressors and mental health challenges that their non-athlete peers do not experience, including balancing academics, competition, injury, and scholarship expectations. In “A Letter to College Sports,” Vanderbilt student-athlete Cailin Bracken reflected on the deaths of several collegiate athletes and wrote that many student-athletes can resonate with the experiences of those who have taken their lives. Supporters of A.B. 1985 argue increased education and transparency about these experiences could create environments where athletes feel comfortable seeking help.

Arguments Against A.B. 1985

Critics of the legislation raise concerns regarding funding and implementation. California faces an estimated $18 billion budget deficit in fiscal year 2026. Much of the state’s revenue is already constitutionally committed to education funding, reserve deposits, and debt repayment, leaving limited flexibility for new mandates. Opponents argue that, even if training is relatively inexpensive to implement, the recurring training creates additional administrative responsibilities for universities during a time of fiscal constraint. They contend that the limited educational resources should be directed towards academics, financial aid, and general student services before providing additional services for student-athletes. 

Others question whether coach training addresses the underlying problem. Most colleges and universities provide counseling centers and mental health professionals to students, who are trained in-depth to assess and treat mental illness. Critics argue while coaches may be well positioned to recognize behavioral changes, they are not mental health professionals and lack the expertise to respond appropriately to complex mental health crises. Instead, opponents say universities may achieve better outcomes by expanding access to licensed counselors and reducing wait times for mental health services. 

Finally, some note that coaches hold significant authority over play time, roster positions, and scholarships. These power dynamics may discourage student-athletes from disclosing mental health concerns. They contend that training alone cannot overcome the mental health stigma in collegiate athletics; many athletes fear appearing weak or risking their athletic career by seeking help. Critics also point to high-profile cases of abusive coaching cultures, including the Larry Nassar case, arguing that some athletes may not trust their coaches. 

Future Outlook

If enacted, the Sarah Shulze Law would take effect by July 1, 2028, and could spur broader discussions about mental health in athletics. Future research may need to examine whether the policy increases referrals to counseling services or improves communication between athletes and coaches. Continued national attention surrounding the deaths of Sarah Shulze, Katie Meyer, Maddy Holleran, Morgan Rodgers, and many others may also lead to additional state legislation or future NCAA policies focused on suicide prevention and mental health support systems. 

Frequently Asked Questions