In pupils and attendance, further providing for definitions and providing for mental health days.
SB 781 amends Pennsylvania’s Public School Code to require every public, nonpublic, and private school board or governing body to adopt a policy, by the start of the 2026-2027 school year, allowing excused absences for “mental health days.” The bill defines a mental health day as an absence used for care, rest, or treatment when a student’s well-being is at risk because of mental or physical fatigue tied to a certified or uncertified mental health-related condition. It also revises the definition of “excused absence” to include absences permitted under the new mental health day section.
The bill limits use of mental health days to no more than two consecutive days, and generally bars three or more mental health days in a week or in two consecutive weeks unless a school’s policy provides otherwise. It directs the Pennsylvania Department of Education to issue implementation guidelines and a model policy within 90 days of the section’s effective date, including evidence-based guidance on integrating mental health day responses into student support systems and on contacting students who use multiple mental health days to connect them with support. The bill also defines a wide range of certified and uncertified mental health-related conditions and circumstances, including anxiety, depression, ADHD, autism, bullying, grief, trauma, burnout, and family or community incidents.
If enacted, the bill would change the Public School Code by creating a new statewide attendance category for mental health days and requiring schools to update attendance policies and procedures. It would affect school districts, charter schools, cyber charter schools, independent schools, and other nonpublic/private schools covered by the act, while also giving the Department of Education a new role in issuing guidance and a model policy. The measure is designed to make student mental health-related absences more clearly excused and standardized across schools.
The overall sentiment reflected by the bill text is supportive of student well-being and access to mental health-related flexibility in attendance rules. Although there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, the bill’s structure suggests a policy approach focused on normalization of mental health care, trauma-informed attendance practices, and early intervention when students show signs of fatigue or distress. The inclusion of consultation with a diverse student advisory group and school administrators also indicates an intent to ground implementation in stakeholder input.
The main points of potential contention are likely to be the breadth of the definitions and the administrative burden on schools. Critics may question whether allowing excused absences for uncertified conditions, grief, burnout, bullying, and other stressors could make attendance enforcement more difficult or invite inconsistent application. Others may raise concerns about how schools will verify eligibility, how often students can use the days, and whether the requirement to contact students after multiple mental health days could strain school staffing and counseling resources.
SB 781 would amend the Public School Code of 1949 by adding a new section on mental health days and revising the definition of excused absence to include absences permitted under that section. It would require school governing bodies to adopt mental health day policies by the 2026-2027 school year, and it would direct the Department of Education to publish implementation guidelines and a model policy. The bill would affect attendance rules for public, nonpublic, private, charter, cyber charter, and independent schools, and would expand the range of absences that must be treated as excused under state law.
The bill appears broadly supportive of student mental health and trauma-informed attendance policy. Its language emphasizes care, rest, treatment, and school-based support rather than punishment for absences, suggesting a favorable posture toward students experiencing stress, grief, or mental health-related fatigue. No votes or committee testimony are provided, so there is no recorded opposition or support beyond the bill’s text, but the policy direction is clearly pro-student and pro-access to mental health accommodations.
Likely areas of contention include the scope of the new excused-absence category, especially the inclusion of uncertified conditions and broad stress-related circumstances such as burnout, bullying, grief, and community trauma. School administrators may be concerned about implementation, documentation, and consistency across districts, as well as the requirement to contact students who use multiple mental health days and connect them to support. Some may also question whether the limits on consecutive and weekly use are sufficient or whether the policy could be difficult to administer without additional guidance and resources.