The Costs Of Mental Health Parity: Still An Impediment?
- 1 May 2006
- journal article
- Published by Health Affairs (Project Hope) in Health Affairs
- Vol. 25 (3), 623-634
- https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.25.3.623
Abstract
Parity in mental health benefits rectifies unfairness in health insurance coverage and reduces financial risk for those with mental illness. However, increased coverage for mental illness has been seen as creating inefficiencies and increasing total spending, based largely on results from the RAND Health Insurance Experiment conducted in the 1970s. Newer evidence suggests that cost control techniques associated with managed care give health plans alternatives to discriminatory coverage for containing costs. We review both eras of research on mental health insurance and conclude that comprehensive parity implemented in the context of managed care would have little impact on total spending.Keywords
This publication has 10 references indexed in Scilit:
- Mental Health Policy and Psychotropic DrugsThe Milbank Quarterly, 2005
- Twelve-Month Use of Mental Health Services in the United StatesArchives of General Psychiatry, 2005
- Evidence-Based Medicine In The United States—De Rigueur Or Dream Deferred?Health Affairs, 2005
- Service-level selection by HMOs in MedicareJournal of Health Economics, 2003
- Will Parity in Coverage Result in Better Mental Health Care?New England Journal of Medicine, 2001
- Mission unfulfilled: potholes on the road to mental health parity.Health Affairs, 1999
- Mental Health and Substance Abuse Coverage Under Health ReformHealth Affairs, 1994
- Supply-Side and Demand-Side Cost Sharing in Health CareJournal of Economic Perspectives, 1993
- The Effect of Insurance Benefit Changes on Use of Child and Adolescent Outpatient Mental Health ServicesMedical Care, 1993
- Regulatory Policy and Information Deficiencies in the Market for Mental Health ServicesJournal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 1989