Maeve Zhu, an undergraduate at the University of Washington, said moving to Seattle with hopes of studying computer science quickly became overwhelming.
"The hardest part for adjusting to life in the U.S. as an international undergrad was also my first year living overseas alone without my parents around me," said Maeve Zhu, an undergraduate at UW. "Trying to manage your time, your money, and your energy, all while being so lonely, the first year felt like living in a nightmare."
Zhu's experience reflects a broader issue, based on a 2023 Purdue University study, nearly half of the 220,000 international students surveyed nationwide experienced major depression, anxiety, or suicidal thoughts. Many UW students are also facing growing mental health challenges as they try to adjust to life in the U.S. This emotional toll was compounded by academic pressure. She said she initially dreamed of becoming a computer science major but struggled with the language barriers and complex coursework.
"Although my TOEFL (English test for non-native speakers) speaking score was very high, I couldn't even get a word in a class full of native speakers," she said. "When I looked at the lecture slides, there were a lot of words I had no idea about.
After that, Zhu began to question her abilities. “I know that I'm not a talented student, I'm not that intelligent, or I'm not that hard working,” she said. "So I just gave up.”
Ariona Scott, a mental health counselor at the University of Washington Counseling Center, explains how students’ upbringing and the stress of a new environment can take a toll on their self-confidence.
"They can't move throughout the world in the same way, things are kind of perceived differently,” she said. “Like confidence difficulties, because they come into a new environment and there are things they're not able to do.”
“There might be different classroom styles and just sort of a lot of things that they might have to adjust to," Scott emphasized. Kristin Liu, a graduate student in information management at the UW, shared a similar struggle. After arriving in Seattle from China, she found herself trapped in mental health challenges.
“Language was my biggest obstacle; it became a psychological barrier,” Liu said. “I rarely talked with native speakers unless I absolutely had to. It made me doubt whether I was capable of doing things or even trying.”
Liu said she has previously undergone therapy for OCD(Obsessive Compulsive Disorder), eating disorders, and mild anxiety and depression. During her life in Seattle, her existing challenges became even more difficult due to the lack of a familiar support system and cultural isolation.
“Isolation is a huge problem; I couldn't find a social support system for me in this new cultural environment," she said. "And then I felt a stronger sense of emptiness after being away from the bustling life back in China.”
A 2023 study in the National Library of Medicine found that Asian international students, especially those from China, faced higher acculturation stress and were more vulnerable to mental health problems. The study noted that 45% of Chinese students in one U.S. university reported depression symptoms, and Chinese students in Australia also showed higher stress and anxiety levels than their domestic peers.
At the same time, political pressure has also increased the psychological burden on these students, leaving them feeling hopeless about their future. According to a report by The Daily UW on April 17, 2025, the Trump administration revoked the visas of 20 students from the UW Seattle campus. Liu said that one of her friends also had their visa revoked. This makes her feel mentally complicated and pessimistic about the world's direction.
“Yes, I have a friend whose visa was cancelled, and she is very worried,” she said. “I feel despair and confusion about this downward spiraling world. I dare not imagine where the future will go. “I don’t know how international students should cope with it,” Liu said.
The uncertainty Liu expressed points to a deeper insight: when political pressure, cultural isolation, and academic pressure overlap, they form a strong mental burden. Many international students have to deal with not only academics but also the political impact.
Despite the challenges, Ms. Zhu is beginning to find ways to manage their mental health, whether through personal habits or campus resources, and is working to regain balance in their life.
“I started going to IMA to exercise, supplementing with vitamin B, D, magnesium, calcium, and zinc. I even started researching food recipes on my own, and stepped out of my comfort zone to try to join clubs to make new friends,” she said. “The Telus Health psychological counseling platform recommended by UW was also very useful.”
Obviously, trying different routines and tapping into campus resources has clearly helped Zhu feel more mentally balanced, and she gradually adapted to life overseas. “I now know what I want and what I should do. I am full of gratitude for the natural beauty and sunny days in Seattle,” Zhu said. “I also hope that my good attitude and good magnetic field can make people around me feel happy, instead of complaining all day long.”
While Zhu found some relief through campus offerings, Liu’s story highlights the limitations of traditional treatments, especially for those dealing with deep-rooted problems or genetic reasons.
“The doctor told me that I was naturally lacking a hormone, which was lower than the normal value,” she said. “I am currently taking the medicine from the school health center, but it has not yet reached the theoretical time when the medicine will start to work, so I don't know.”
Meanwhile, Liu believes that the change of seasons has also made a considerable impact on her.
“In spring, along with the awakening of everything, my traumatic flashbacks and depression are also awakened,” she said. “I was immersed in such emotions for too long, just like a spring that has been stretched beyond its elastic limit and cannot be restored.”
Arsene Chi is a senior journalism student at the University of Washington. He focuses on stories about international students, mental health, cinema, and community culture.
Arsene was one of the students in the "Media Responsibility in a Diverse Society" class, taught by Hugo Balta. Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum, and the publisher of the Latino News Network.
The Fulcrum is committed to nurturing the next generation of journalists. Learn more by clicking HERE.
image of U.S. President Donald Trump is displayed on a digital billboard in Times Square in New York on April 8, 2026.
Trump is stuck between two realities. Neither serves the American people
Normally, I worry that events may overtake a column. But not so with the Iran war.
I don’t worry about running afoul of a headline or Truth Social post from the president because what is said about the situation is no longer very relevant to the reality.
On April 8, Nick Catoggio, my Dispatch colleague, dubbed an earlier stoppage with Iran “Schrödinger’s ceasefire.” This was a reference to the famous thought experiment by the physicist Erwin Schrödinger, who was trying to explain the weirdness of “superpositionality” in quantum physics. A cat in a box is both dead and alive at the same time until you open the box. Schrödinger meant to illustrate the absurdity of the idea that particles aren’t any one thing, but a “cloud of probabilities.”
The Trump administration is stuck in a word cloud of probabilities of his own making. The war is over. The war is on. The war isn’t a war. We have a deal, but we don’t have a deal, but we’re about to have a deal. We destroyed Iran’s military. No, we left it intact. We want regime change. No we don’t. We already accomplished it. We “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear program a year ago. We had to go to war in February to prevent nuclear war. The Strait of Hormuz is open, closed, or something in-between. No deal without “unconditional surrender.” Let’s make a deal!
This everything-all-at-once vibe can be disorienting, particularly since most Americans didn’t have a war with Iran on their bingo cards until the shooting had already started. President Trump didn’t prepare the country or consult with Congress beforehand because he thought it would all be a smashing success in a matter of weeks.
The miscalculation that started it all: killing Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and much of Iran’s senior leadership, on the first day of the war. To “the great proud people of Iran, I say tonight that the hour of your freedom is at hand,” Trump announced on Feb. 28. “When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take. This will be probably your only chance for generations.”
I support regime change in Iran and shed no tears for Khamenei or his goons. But when you start a war by killing the regime’s top leaders, it’s not unreasonable for the remaining ones to conclude that you really intend regime change.
Khamenei was a murderous fanatic, but he was a fairly cautious one. He liked to threaten closing the Strait of Hormuz or attacking our regional allies, but he was reluctant to actually do it, fearing it would invite a regime change war. The mullahs and IRGC goons believed, not unreasonably, that if they lost their grip on power, they’d be lynched by the Iranian people they’ve brutalized for decades.
By starting with a regime change war, Trump removed any reason for the regime not to go for broke. When you have nothing to lose — particularly when you are a millenarian religious fanatic — a Persian Alamo strategy makes a lot of sense.
So Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz and attacked its neighbors.
But it turns out this wasn’t the Alamo. In the contest of wills, Trump blinked. The Iranian regime’s tolerance for punishment proved — so far — to be greater than Trump’s and that of our gulf allies. Militarily we could finish the job, but that would require ground troops and much greater economic turmoil. In a conflict Trump launched unilaterally without the prior support of Congress, NATO or the American people, Trump doesn’t have the political capital for that.
But that’s only half the problem. Trump wants the war over, but he doesn’t want to pay — militarily, economically, politically — what that would cost. So he wants to make a deal that ends it. But there is no deal available that wouldn’t come at an equally undesirable cost. Any deal that looks like what President Obama struck with the Iranians would be too embarrassing to bear. But the Iranians are convinced that they can get just such a deal, and they’re willing to drag things out as long as it takes.
The result: Trump’s in a box of his own making. He thinks he can talk his way out by simply asserting a reality that doesn’t exist. When the financial markets get nervous, he announces a breakthrough that is, at best, a possibility. When the Iranians agree to a deal that looks similar to one Obama might negotiate, Trump goes back to his threats.
It can’t go on forever. But I’m sure it’ll last until long after this column is forgotten.
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.