Myles-Jay Linton reports the findings of research exploring students giving permission – or not – for their families to be contacted in the case of a mental health emergency
This article is more than 4 years old

Ensuring that students are encouraged to develop independently, while also making sure that the best support is available to them in the most serious of circumstances remains a challenge for universities.
I’ve been teaching in universities since 2015. In that time, I’ve seen first hand that for students university can be a time for tremendous growth but also personal difficulty.
Navigating the transitions into, through and out of university involves ongoing social, academic and psychological hurdles. Nationally available data indicates rising levels of mental health difficulties among young people and rising requests for mental health support among university students.
The University of Bristol launched a new student mental health strategy in 2018. The strategy included a policy where students are given the opportunity at registration to declare whether the university may contact their emergency contact if there are serious concerns about their mental health and welfare. Emergency contacts are often parents, but they could also be partners, siblings or another part of a student’s social network.
Having a policy like this in place enables staff supporting students to make an informed decision about widening the circle of support available to a student if the university identifies that they are experiencing serious challenges to their welfare. These are important decisions, and they have legal, ethical and practical implications. Understandably, the advantages and disadvantages a policy like this presents have prompted ongoing debate across the sector.
Readers familiar with the University Mental Health Charter introduced in 2019 will know that one of the key sections of the “Support” domain is guidance on information sharing. The Information Commissioner’s Office has also provided practical tips. Both overlap in their recognition of circumstances where it is in the best interests of a student to share information with relevant emergency contacts.
At the University of Bristol the overwhelming majority (93 per cent in 2018) of students do opt in. National data from the 2020 HEPI/Advance HE student academic experience survey of more than 10,000 full-time undergraduate students also indicated that only 16 per cent of students would not want their parents contacted if there were any/extreme concerns about their mental health. Nonetheless, because so few universities are known to invite students to opt in there is very little evidence outlining how students subject to this policy actually perceive it.
I initiated a research project on the topic of opting into the emergency contact protocol with three questions in mind:
My research used data collected through the annual University of Bristol Student Wellbeing Survey. The survey has been running since 2018 and was developed with collaborative input from academics, students, sabbatical offers, and student services staff, embodying a whole university approach. All registered students are invited to participate in the online anonymous survey each year.
Along with demographic questions and measures of mental health, in 2019 students were invited to anonymously report whether they had opted in at registration, and if not, why. The reasons students provided were analysed qualitatively to better understand the underlying motivations driving how students opted.
The majority of students surveyed could not remember whether they had opted in or not at registration (54 per cent). Most of the students who did remember their decision opted in (25 per cent) and the smallest proportion of students did not opt in (18 per cent).
Mature students, students from a black, Asian or minority ethnic background and international students were significantly less likely to opt in. Students who reported higher levels of anxiety and depression symptoms were also less likely to opt in.
The four main reasons students did not opt in were:
Reviewing all of this data there are three clear policy recommendations:
An important limitation of the research is that the survey respondents represented only ten per cent of students within the University of Bristol. Nonetheless, the most valuable part of the research so far has been sharing the findings with staff and students across the university.
The results have prompted conversations with staff about how to discuss the policy with students encountering difficulties resistant to family involvement. Simultaneously, insights from staff members supporting students on a daily basis have informed future research plans.
View and download the full published research findings here.

Jim Dickinson | Analysis | 4/09/26
Ola Thomson | Analysis | 27/08/26

Wendy Ashall | Analysis | 26/08/26

Jim Dickinson | Analysis | 25/08/26

David Kernohan | Analysis | 12/08/26
New comments will come back with sign-in later this year.
Alan Smithee · 3 Mar 2022
As people at the sharp end know – Very very difficult with some groups to work out if it is a real opt-in or a ‘required’ opt-in from family members – like how some students have parents that veto internships or where they live or who they mix with.
Having said that – an important piece of work read the paper over lunch and would recommend others do the same.
Myles-Jay Linton · 7 Mar 2022
Hi Alan, I’m pleased you found the article a valuable read. I also think you make a really good point about ‘who’ is opting-in when the policy decision can be so heavily influenced by the emergency contact. I really hope the forthcoming research helps to unpack the (many) reasons lots of students do opt-in.
Anna Brooke · 11 Mar 2022
Thanks for this Myles-Jay. We are encouraging our daughter’s University (another Russell Group Uni) to consider “opt-in” so your paper is a useful tool in that conversation.