• Front page
• Receive letters on your RSS reader

I was discouraged by the stigma and misinformation conveyed in the Rocky Mountain News editorial of April 5, “Smitten by mandates.” As the director of the eating disorder treatment program at The Children’s Hospital, I see patients with anorexia nervosa, a mental illness that leads to life threatening bradycardia and malnutrition. The inference that money is wasted on the treatment of eating disorders, defined as “cajoling you into eating,” was particularly provocative and dismissive of people who suffer from these illnesses and those who care for them.
The proposed legislation will base coverage on medical necessity, as we currently do with standard medical coverage. All federal employees have had comprehensive parity for mental health and substance abuse treatment since 2001. A study comparing utilization of services and spending in the Federal Employee Health Benefit program found that “Spending increases did not occur, and that parity reduced out-of-pocket spending by employees for mental health and substance abuse services.”
Thirty-one states have enacted partial parity laws. In addition to federal employees, eight states have comprehensive parity laws.
Parity will make a significant and positive difference for individuals and families who otherwise will experience greater disability due to inadequate access to care due to discriminatory insurance coverage.
Dr. Jennifer Hagman, Denver,
The Children’s Hospital and associate professor of psychiatry, University of Colorado
Health Sciences Center

READER COMMENTS

POST A COMMENT

• Taxes and health care
• Gov. Ritter and unions
• Former Gov. Owens on Gov. Ritter’s unions
• Roan plateau is a treasure
• Homelessness and mental illness
• Paper ballots are the answer
• Greenhouse gases
• Voting machine controversy