Noting another positive sign of the times at first guess, Wall Street Journal (WSJ) gives their take on Congress' progress towards passing improved employer-provided mental-health coverage (S. 558, H.R. 1424):
At first glance, I thought, "Oh, how, cool, mental health parity is getting some good play over at WSJ, just as they did for accessible home design so very recently.."
Then I read the article.. Sigh.......
Persons with mental illness (PWMIs) just can't seem to catch a societal break.. If what WSJ is reporting is true, yes, there will likely be mental health parity in health insurance provisions, BUT..
- Premiums for everyone will rise..
- Stigma levels against PWMIs theoretically could also rise in tandem instead of fall as they take the blame for the fallout from increased insurance deductions in worker paychecks..
Was this part that unfortunately made complete sense:
Congress also must decide how to fund the bill's cost. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the House bill would reduce federal tax revenues by $3.1 billion from 2008 through 2017 because the bill would result in higher premiums and, as a result, lower taxable wages.
Yeah, can't help but feel another eminent rise in the stigma against PWMIs as they will surely take the hit for something that just should have been modus operandi in the first place in a Land that professes Equality for All..
Cyber hugs from Talking Rock..