TL;DR
Get health and wellness essentials delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
A MedPage Today opinion essay by child psychiatrist Jonathan Slater argues that several candidates who won office in the Nov. 3, 2026, midterm elections could offer young people visible role models across differences in identity and experience. The piece links that idea to research on role models, cross-group friendships and civic participation, but does not report new clinical findings or measure an effect of the election on children.
Child psychiatrist Jonathan Slater argues that several candidates elected in the November 3, 2026, midterm elections could give children examples of belonging, resilience and cooperation across differences. In a November 4 MedPage Today opinion essay, Slater connects the candidates’ backgrounds to research on role models and youth well-being; the essay is an argument about the elections’ potential meaning, not a study measuring their effect on children.
Slater points to candidates with varied careers and life experiences, including Annie Andrews, a pediatric hospitalist elected to the Senate from South Carolina; Adam Hamilton, a pastor elected to the Senate from Kansas; and Josh Turek, an Iowa senator-elect who won two Paralympic gold medals in wheelchair basketball. He also names Rebecca Bennett, a former Navy helicopter pilot elected to the House from New Jersey. These descriptions and election results are presented in Slater’s essay, which cites a New York Times report on the new officeholders.
The essay also highlights candidates Slater describes as breaking representation milestones: Georgia governor-elect Keisha Lance Bottoms as the first Black woman elected governor in the country, New Hampshire senator-elect Chris Pappas as the first openly gay man in the Senate, and Michigan senator-elect Abdul El-Sayed as the first Muslim senator. Slater says 29-year-old Melat Kiros will be the first Gen Z woman elected to Congress and that James Talarico, a former middle-school teacher, will be the Senate’s youngest member at 37. These are claims attributed to the essay; the source material does not independently document them.
Slater says children who see people with identities or experiences like their own in public life may feel less isolated. He cites Trevor Project survey findings, including that 90% of LGBTQ+ young people surveyed in 2024 said politics had hurt their well-being in the previous year. He also refers to research on role models and civic involvement. The essay does not provide study links or establish that the election results themselves changed children’s mental health.
Representation as a Source of Belonging
The essay’s central point is that visibility can matter to young people who rarely see their identities or experiences reflected among people in power. Slater gives the examples of a gay teenager seeing an openly gay man win a Senate seat and a child who uses a wheelchair seeing a Paralympian elected. He argues those moments could help children imagine a wider range of futures, though the article offers these as illustrations rather than measured outcomes.
Slater also stresses that role models need not share a child’s politics. He notes that Hamilton had been a registered Republican and that Turek had once voted for George W. Bush. The broader lesson he draws is that disagreement can coexist with respect, and that children can value someone’s perseverance or service without endorsing every position they hold.
Products Worth Considering
Therabody Theragun Mini 3rd Gen Massage Gun (Travel Essential, Black)
Fitbit Charge 6 Fitness Tracker – Obsidian/Black
Garmin Forerunner 570 GPS Running Smartwatch, 47mm, Aluminum, Black
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
The Election and Slater’s Argument
Slater’s essay follows a campaign season that he says exposed children to attack ads, online comments and adults arguing about politics. He recalls writing earlier about the New York Knicks’ championship as a teaching moment for parents, then describes his son’s suggestion that the election results offered another opportunity to discuss decency and difference with children and pediatric patients.
The author also discusses Ohio governor-elect Amy Acton, a physician and former state health director. Slater says Acton has spoken publicly about childhood trauma and that an opponent’s campaign ad featured her estranged mother disputing her account. He presents Acton’s willingness to discuss her history as a possible example for patients who feel defined by trauma. The source material does not include a response from the opponent or additional reporting on the ad.
To support his broader argument, Slater cites research on LGBTQ+ role models, cross-group friendships and adolescent civic participation. He refers to a study following more than 9,000 young people into adulthood, saying volunteering and voting were associated with better mental health and fewer risky behaviors later. The essay does not supply the study’s full citation, so its methods and limits cannot be assessed from the provided material.
What the Essay Does Not Establish
The essay is an opinion piece, not an evaluation of children’s mental health before and after the election. It does not establish whether young people saw or followed the races, how they responded, or whether representation among elected officials changes mental-health outcomes. Slater’s references to surveys and research support his argument but are not presented with full study details in the supplied material.
The source material also does not independently verify all election results, the candidate descriptions or the stated representation milestones. It is not clear from the essay what roles the named candidates will hold once results are finalized, what policies they will pursue, or how they will work across party lines. The supplied excerpt ends while referring to a warning from the head of the American Psychological Association, so the rest of that discussion is unavailable.
How the Winners’ Work Develops
The next concrete developments will be the elected officials’ assumption of office and the actions they take on issues affecting children, health care and their communities. Slater’s essay does not identify specific policy proposals, legislative deadlines or plans by the candidates to work together, so those details remain to be established through their public statements and official actions.
For parents and pediatric clinicians, Slater’s suggested next step is to discuss the election with children as an opportunity to talk about role models, personal difference and respectful disagreement. That is the author’s recommendation, rather than guidance issued by a medical organization or a finding tested in the essay.
Key Questions
What is the news development?
Jonathan Slater published an opinion essay arguing that candidates elected in the November 2026 midterms could serve as role models for children because of their varied identities and life experiences.
Does the essay show that the election improved children’s mental health?
No. Slater cites surveys and research on role models and civic involvement, but the essay does not measure the election’s effect on children or establish a causal link.
Which candidates does Slater highlight?
He names pediatrician Annie Andrews, pastor Adam Hamilton, Paralympian Josh Turek and former Navy pilot Rebecca Bennett, among others. These candidate descriptions and results are reported in Slater’s essay and are not independently verified by the supplied material.
What does Slater say children can learn from political differences?
Slater argues that children can admire someone’s service or perseverance without agreeing with that person’s politics. He says respectful disagreement is compatible with decency.
Source: medpagetoday.com
