Wellstone Parity Law is Seriously Flawed

Posted on September 21, 2008 in Insurance

The [[Paul Wellstone]] mental health parity bill which is now before Congress has been endorsed by the National Association for the Mentally Ill and the Mental Health Association on the theory that something is better than nothing. Barack Obama has endorsed it. Our opposition, Mean John McCain, has not endorsed nor authored any parity bill so we can assume he opposes the concept.

Parity means that the so-called “mental illnesses” will be treated like “physical” ones. Because illnesses such as depression, bipolar disorder, autism, and schizophrenia have been shown to have organic components and new information is coming in about borderline disorder and other so-called “personality disorders”, the line between “mental” and “physical” is disappearing. Diseases that afflict thinking and emotions are no different from those that afflict other aspects of our metabolism. That insurance companies will freely dispense medications for the colon while refusing to pay for lithium and similar drugs says a great deal about their priorities.

Three purposes underline the struggle for parity:

* Eliminating discrimination against mental illness
* Expanding access to appropriate mental health care
* Reducing the stigma of mental illness

Opponents of parity claim without any facts that parity will dramatically raise health costs. Studies conducted in states with full parity and the federal health system show that the rise in costs is no more than 1%. Parity also helps lower costs by seeing that workers receive appropriate care and, therefore, are more productive and spend less time taking off from work.

So the Wellstone bill is a great step. But it is misleading. Having been through many years of Republican rewrites, the bill as it now stands might undermine the objectives. The insurance industry, in particular, has been against parity and has dispatched their lobbyists to Washington to amend the bill so that it contains certain flaws that will make the situation of persons with “mental” disorders worse:

* The law requires that parity be offered if the insurance plan offers both physical and mental illness coverage. Companies can duck parity simply by dropping mental health coverage. Insurance companies can claim that losses of 2% make parity coverage infeasible.
* It does not provide full mental health parity for persons with Medicare or Medicaid.
* It does not require that all health plans offer both physical and mental health coverage.

Paul Wellstone meant so much more when he sponsored the original bill. The current act makes discrimination more a part of our daily life. It would behoove Obama if he were to repudiate it and call for a real parity law that dispenses with these loopholes. If the current version of the Wellstone Act were enacted, my wife and I could find ourselves saddled with hundreds if not thousands of dollars in prescription drug expenses. I could be forced to drop certain effective medicines and be put in the dangerous position having to find cheaper, less effective substitutes. During this time, the changes could precipitate an episode which could destroy the peace of mind of my family and my own safety.

I cannot stand by while an ersatz parity bill becomes the law of the land. I believe that Obama wants better and I call on him to take a hard look at the current bill. Note that while NAMI and MHA support the bill, the Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance which includes former Kings County Commissioner Randy Revelle does not for the reasons I have cited. Parity must be the law of the land for everyone: we can afford no loopholes. Worse than nothing is not better than nothing.

[tags]parity, mental health, mental illness, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, depression, insurance, Wellstone, Paul Wellstone, insurance[/tags]