Mental Health Update: Expanding Services, But Limiting Access

February 6, 2013 by · 3 Comments
Filed under: Medicaid, Mental Health, Mental Illness 

zack-buck_4As I mentioned here last month, government leaders are turning their attention to mental health issues — focusing on diagnosis and access to treatment, in particular — in the wake of the horrific shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut in December.  Even though it remains unclear whether or not the shooter suffered from any form of mental disorder, many leaders have argued that expanding treatment access for those suffering from mental disorders will prevent future tragedies.

As President Obama pledges to define the new mental health essential benefits under the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”), state leadership is also beginning to react.  Perhaps somewhat surprisingly, South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley (R) — the leader of the state that had cut mental health funding by nearly 40 percent from 2009 to 2012 (mentioned here) — is now leading the call to increase funding and services for those diagnosed with mental illness.

In addition to her proposal to increase funding for mental health services by $16 million in the summer of 2012, Haley has now called for an additional $11.3 million in funding for the South Carolina Department of Mental Health (“SCDMH”); in fact, her total proposed budget for the SCDMH in the 2013 budget is $17 million.  Haley has been particularly outspoken on the issue, noting that “[t]here is nothing wrong with someone who has a mental health issue….  There is something very wrong when that person doesn’t get treatment….  These are good productive citizens that deserve to live good, healthy life [sic].  And if given treatment they can be incredibly successful.  If not given treatment, we as a state have failed.”

She has argued that increasing funding for mental health treatment can prevent another tragedy like the one seen at Newtown.  Treating an increase in mental health funding as an alternative to implementing additional gun control or gun safety measures, Haley mentioned that “[n]o amount of gun control can stop someone from getting a gun when they want to get it.  What we can do is control mental health in a way that we treat people.”

Undoubtedly, the increase in funding is an abrupt policy change from South Carolina’s recent history.  From 2008 to 2012, the state was cutting funding to the South Carolina Department of Mental Health by an average of $70 million per year.

Ironically, however, Governor Haley is speaking during the exact same time that all states are deciding whether or not to expand their Medicaid programs under the ACA — which would affect many individuals’ access to mental health services.  Just earlier this week, Ohio Governor John Kasich (R) agreed to expand his state’s Medicaid program, while Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett (R) has decided to opt-out of the expansion.  Corbett’s refusal made Pennsylvania the eleventh state to decline to expand its Medicaid program.  And who else is staunchly opposed to expanding her state’s Medicaid program?

South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley.

This past summer, Governor Haley announced “via Facebook that South Carolina ‘will NOT expand Medicaid, or participate in any health exchanges’” (emphasis in original).  According to the Health Affairs Blog, South Carolina’s refusal to expand its Medicaid program would prevent more than 500,000 South Carolinians from being granted healthcare coverage.  In other words, if Haley had decided to expand her state’s Medicaid enrollment pursuant to the ACA, South Carolina’s Medicaid enrollment would increase from about 951,000 currently (which is nearly one in every five South Carolinians) to nearly 1.5 million in FY 2014.

Governor Haley’s recent positions create a situation in which the state is increasing funding for mental health service offerings in the state, but is refusing to expand coverage (paid for in whole by the federal government for three years) to many individuals who currently lack access to the services. Needless to say, positions taken on health policy issues cannot be examined in isolation.

Indeed, according to the Congressional Budget Office, if all states agreed to opt-in to the Medicaid expansion under the ACA, 13 million more Americans would have their mental health treatments covered by Medicaid.  However, given the policy positions like those of Governor Haley, this — unfortunately — remains highly unlikely.   Treatment offerings can increase, but if individuals do not have insurance coverage to pay for those services, access and receipt of those services is likely to remain largely elusive.

Share

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments

3 Responses to “Mental Health Update: Expanding Services, But Limiting Access”
  1. M Hollingsworth says:
    03/07/2013 at 9:41 pm

    South Carolina has now adopted a policy for state/county mental health clinics. MD’s are prohibited from prescribing any controlled substances. That includes Class IV non-narcotic drugs that have a low incidence of abuse (according to the DEA). There are few options for treating some disorders and Class IV substances are the only drugs currently approved for treating some disorders. Throw all the money into the system you want, but if you tie the hands of the treating physicians, then it’s all for show. The main motivation for an across the board ruling like this is to limit liability. However, liability for NOT treating or under-treating a condition resulting in suffering, injury, or death is a greater liability. Respect the physicians.

  2. M Hollingsworth says:
    03/07/2013 at 10:09 pm

    South Carolina has now adopted a policy for state/county mental health
    clinics. MD’s are prohibited from prescribing any controlled substances.
    That includes Class IV non-narcotic drugs that have a low incidence of
    abuse (according to the DEA). There are few options for treating some
    disorders and Class IV substances are the only drugs currently approved
    for treating some disorders. Throw all the money into the system you
    want, but if you tie the hands of the treating physicians, then it’s all
    for show. The main motivation for an across the board ruling like this
    is to limit liability. However, liability for NOT treating or
    under-treating a condition resulting in suffering, injury, or death is a
    greater liability. Help the patients. Respect the physicians.

  3. Lisa Potts says:
    03/13/2013 at 5:02 pm

    Haley needs to go and go quickly. The citizens of our state cannot take another four years of her ignorant dialogue. We have to expand medicaid and it is flat out retarded not to use federal dollars to do so.

Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!