Explained: Why exam pressure has become a public mental health crisis, not a private struggle
Srinagar, Jan 29: The declaration of Secondary and Higher Secondary examination results in Kashmir has once again brought student mental health and safety into sharp focus. Amid intense comparison-driven narratives and public scrutiny of marks, concerns have grown over the psychological toll on students. In response, the Jammu and Kashmir government has announced the constitution of District-Level Monitoring Committees to prevent student suicides, in compliance with directions issued by the Supreme Court of India.
The move follows the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment in Sukdeb Saha v. State of Andhra Pradesh, which recognised student mental health as an enforceable right. The case stemmed from the death of a teenage NEET aspirant in a hostel, prompting her father, Sukdeb Saha, to approach the apex court seeking accountability and systemic reform to address student distress.
The Supreme Court held that academic pressure, isolation and institutional neglect are not private misfortunes but constitutional concerns. Interpreting Article 21, the Court ruled that the right to life includes the right to mental health. It imposed binding obligations on schools, colleges, hostels, and coaching centres, including private NEET and JEE institutes. Institutions were directed to frame mental health policies, appoint qualified counsellors, train staff to identify distress, establish confidential grievance mechanisms, and ensure visibility of suicide-prevention helplines and safety measures.
Announcing the District-Level Monitoring Committees on Wednesday, the J&K government cited rising stress among students, exacerbated by post-pandemic challenges and social media pressure.
Prof (Dr) Yasir Hassan Rather, General Secretary of the J&K Psychiatry Society, said suicidal ideation and attempts are medical emergencies. “These are pathological brain states and must be addressed through a mental health approach grounded in science and evidence,” he said.
While experts have welcomed the committees as an institutional step forward, concerns remain about deeper societal factors. “How effective can monitoring be if the culture of extreme academic competition remains unchanged?” asked Mutayib Nisar, a mathematics teacher. He pointed to the growing trend of public “marks bragging” and extravagant celebration of high achievers, which, he said, leaves many students feeling inadequate and devalued.
Critics argue that unless schools and families actively discourage comparison-driven narratives, structural measures alone may fall short in protecting students’ mental well-being and sense of self-worth.
