- Many opposers of the 2008 bill proposed in the House said the legislation would drive up costs.
- Drug addiction is a lifestyle decision and result of moral failing and personal mistakes, and people should not have to pay for insurance parity for this group of patients.
- Businesses will be faced with the choice of covering every single mental or substance abuse disorder listed in the diagnostic manual or none at all.
- How can it be ensured that the clinical care will be appropriate and effective, and that patients have access to reasonable services that will return them to a level of normal functioning as quickly as possible?
- Recovery from these types of illnesses are unpredictable, long-term, costly, and in some cases, unnecessary.
- There is much transparency surrounding medical necessity criteria.
- The budget will have to be adjusted to find an offset for the measure's $3 billion price tag.
- The House bill of 2007 mandates insurance companies cover all disorders listed in the American Psychiatric Association's manual.
- One study found that the proportion of employees with coverage for mental health care increased from 1991 to 1994.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Cons
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I'm getting a little confused... is your argument pro insurance for mental disorders or pro insurance for mental disorders and addicts? Addicts made their own personal choices to take drugs, and an insurance company should not be responsible for the preventable mistakes of a person. Also, mental disorder insurance could be given only to people making a certain amount of money instead of everyone that demands it, so that poor people needing medicine still receive it.
Post a Comment