The Affordable Care Act requires insurers to cover mental health care just as they do physical care, but a new study shows only half of psychiatrists accept insurance. That means access to care for the millions of people with depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and other mental health issues may be limited to those who can pay for treatment out of their own pockets, despite the law.
via Health law may not broaden access to mental treatment.
You should not be surprised if you’ve been paying attention.
Kathleen Sebelius announces new mental health parity requirements for health insurers | WashingtonExaminer.com.
Sebelius said the administration will post regulations Friday requiring that insurance companies treat mental health issues the same as physical health problems. The new regulations will apply to both outpatient and residential treatment for mental health and addiction, which means patients would have the same deductible and co-payments they’d have going to any other doctor.
The article goes on to say “this isn’t new” so it should be built into the premiums seen today. If not, or the regulations are more extensive than planned on, this will generate even higher rates.
For consumers whose health premiums will go up under new law, sticker shock leads to anger – The Washington Post.
Americans who face higher insurance costs under President Obama’s health-care law are angrily complaining about “sticker shock,” threatening to become a new political force opposing the law even as the White House struggles to convince other consumers that they will benefit from it.
The growing backlash involves people whose plans are being discontinued because the policies don’t meet the law’s more-stringent standards. They’re finding that many alternative policies come with higher premiums and deductibles.
After receiving a letter from her insurer that her plan was being discontinued, Deborah Persico, a 58-year-old lawyer in the District, found a comparable plan on the city’s new health insurance exchange. But her monthly premium, now $297, would be $165 higher, and her maximum out-of-pocket costs would double.
Her “junk” policy was terminated. Are the 10 essential health benefits worth it?
If the press had done their job, there would be no surprise now.
AP: Many Will Have Insurance Cancelled Due to ObamaCare.
Why? Because your policy doesn’t meet the Essential Health Benefit standards, which include the following at a minimum:
- Ambulatory patient services, such as doctor’s visits and outpatient services
- Emergency services
- Maternity and newborn care
- Mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment
- Prescription drugs
- Rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices
- Laboratory services
- Preventive and wellness services and chronic disease management
- Pediatric services, including oral and vision care
The changes don’t seem to square with one of the president’s promises: “If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan.” (emphasis added)
And if you’re just hearing about this, you need to speak with your journalism friends…
This is also a classic case of the media making sure they are on the record reporting something, but only doing so after it is too late to hurt their big government agenda. The media wanted ObamaCare to pass, so the media refused to do any kind of reporting like this when it might have derailed the legislation before it became law.
Four years after passage, though, the Associated Press decides to pretend they are real reporters. The same thing is going to happen if this new immigration reform package passes. Five years from now the AP will report, “Border Not Closed as Promised.” This is what happens when the government and media are both liars and become one.
The closer of this AP piece is especially hilarious. We are assured that those who lose their insurance “won’t object once they realize that the new coverage they will get is better than current bare-bones plans.”
Well, the plans may be a good deal if you qualify for a substantial subsidy and may not if you don’t. The pricing isn’t clear yet. Some states are showing what on the surface appear to be “reasonable” pricing, however these are primarily states (California, Washington, Vermont) that already have very expensive health coverage due to (excessive) government mandates.