Arguments for Keeping Child & Adolescent Psychiatry Focused on Persons Under 18 Years of Age

Child and adolescent psychiatrists and their associations are grappling with the idea of restructuring their subspecialty to including transitional age youth (TAY), sometimes operationalized as persons 18-25 years of age. This consideration is currently before the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (CACAP). This essay identifies several concerning and potentially harmful consequences of widening the age range of child and adolescent psychiatry. A key concern is the consequential and substantial increase in the population mandate which will significantly dilute already strained and limited child and adolescent psychiatry resources. Furthermore, the nature of some of the needs of TAY may preferentially divert resources away from younger patients. The change in age range will also disrupt existing partnerships which facilitate multidisciplinary care and needed efficiencies for the child and adolescent population, such as close working ties with pediatrics and schools. This is not to say that there may not be merit in child and adolescent psychiatrists contributing to the care of TAY, just as our members already contribute to other areas of mental health outside our immediate mandate. However, to advance such a mandate change, a threshold of evidence of a net beneficial impact including a systematic evaluation of potential harms and opportunity costs is needed. Unfortunately, such an assessment has not yet occurred and therefore a mandate and name change is premature. We recommend a much more deliberate evaluation of the role child and adolescent psychiatrists and their associations might play in contributing to the needs of TAY.