Thanks to the Federal Mental Health Parity Act of 2008, employers who provide health insurance plans for mental and substance use disorders are now required to provide benefits that are equal to those given for general medical care. But three years later, is this act actually making a difference in the number of individuals seeking treatment?

Sadly, parity in insurance coverage of substance abuse treatment has not led to increased use of this service or an increase in costs, according to new research. That doesn’t mean the Parity Act has failed, though. In fact, it has done what it was designed to do — lower out-of-pocket expenses for covered individuals.

Those who were against the passing of the Parity Act, argued that if coverage was made more readily available, use will rise dramatically. Experts argue that’s not the case.

“There is always a fear that for substance abuse and mental health, every time a plan is more generous, the utilization will skyrocket, the costs will be so high, and all the insurance companies will start complaining that they won’t be able to afford these services. But this is not true,” lead study author Vanessa Azzone, PhD, researcher and biostatistician in the Department of Health Care Policy at Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts, told Medscape Medical News.

“I think these findings, along with those found in other studies, clear the air for all the people who have been criticizing parity law for mental health treatment,” Dr. Azzone added.

While previous research on the impact of mental health parity mandates has helped to pave the way for the passage of federal legislation, there have been few studies on the effects of parity mandates for substance abuse treatment benefits. That will continue to change as parity laws remain in place and time passes, allowing for more studies.

Drug Abuse Treatment

If you or someone you love is in need of drug abuse treatment, call La Paloma at our toll-free number. Someone is there to take your call 24 hours a day and answer any questions you have about treatment, financing or insurance.

“The new law would bar insurance plans from setting higher co-pays or deductibles for mental health or substance abuse treatment than for medical care,” USA Today reports. “Lower benefit limits also would be illegal, along with caps on the number of outpatient therapy sessions or inpatient treatment days.”

Out-of-network coverage would also extend to mental health care if an employee’s plan included that. The bill that passed was not the original version, which included requiring employer plans to cover every disorder diagnosis listed in the American Psychiatric Association’s DSM book, an extremely lengthy list.

Many covered workers already had some sort of coverage for mental health and substance abuse treatment, whether they knew it or not. Currently, mental health and substance abuse treatment are offered in more than 90 percent of employer-sponsored plans, according to government data. The problem is, most plans have inequities between medical and mental health coverage.

While the passing of this bill is seen as a huge step in the right direction by many in the recovery community, it will likely come at a price: Insurance premiums may go up due to the legislation. Still, both insurance companies and employers recognize that untreated emotional problems and addictions carry an even higher price tag in productivity and physical health issues.