Harvard University.
University of Maryland.
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2017 Dec;42(6):1065-1098. doi: 10.1215/03616878-4193630. Epub 2017 Aug 11.
Over the past twenty-five years, thirty-seven states and the US Congress have passed mental health and substance use disorder (MH/SUD) parity laws to secure nondiscriminatory insurance coverage for MH/SUD services in the private health insurance market and through certain public insurance programs. However, in the intervening years, litigation has been brought by numerous parties alleging violations of insurance parity. We examine the critical issues underlying these legal challenges as a framework for understanding the areas in which parity enforcement is lacking, as well as ongoing areas of ambiguity in the interpretation of these laws. We identified all private litigation involving federal and state parity laws and extracted themes from a final sample of thirty-seven lawsuits. The primary substantive topics at issue include the scope of services guaranteed by parity laws, coverage of certain habilitative therapies such as applied behavioral analysis for autism spectrum disorders, credentialing standards for MH/SUD providers, determinations regarding the medical necessity of MH/SUD services, and the application of nonquantitative treatment limitations under the 2008 federal parity law. Ongoing efforts to achieve nondiscriminatory insurance coverage for MH/SUDs should attend to the major issues subject to private legal action as important areas for facilitating and monitoring insurer compliance.
在过去的二十五年中,三十七个州和美国国会通过了精神健康和物质使用障碍 (MH/SUD) 平权法,以确保私营医疗保险市场和某些公共保险计划中的 MH/SUD 服务不受歧视性保险覆盖。然而,在这期间,许多当事人提起诉讼,指控违反了保险平权。我们研究了这些法律挑战背后的关键问题,作为理解平权执法不力的领域以及这些法律解释中持续存在的模糊领域的框架。我们确定了所有涉及联邦和平权法的私人诉讼,并从最终的三十七个诉讼样本中提取了主题。主要的实质性争议点包括平权法保证的服务范围、某些康复疗法的覆盖范围,如自闭症谱系障碍的应用行为分析、MH/SUD 提供者的认证标准、关于 MH/SUD 服务的医学必要性的决定,以及 2008 年联邦平权法下非定量治疗限制的应用。为实现 MH/SUD 不受歧视性保险覆盖而进行的持续努力应关注可能引发私人法律诉讼的主要问题,这些问题是促进和监测保险公司合规性的重要领域。