- U.S. Navy to start giving gay couples marriage benefits in Japan
- Sen. Harry Reid goes to hospital as a precaution
- Fla.’s Trey Radel exits rehab, ‘excited’ to resume congressional role
- U.S. nuclear general boozed it up, chased ‘hot women’ in Russia: report
- 45 Calif. students at one school test positive for tuberculosis exposure
- Rob Ford on women: Give them cash ‘and they are happy’
- Ku Klux Klan group holds recruitment meeting in Maryland
- Airport assassination: Mayor, 3 others killed at Manila airport
- Tea party-type lawmakers take mysterious, off-books trip to Mideast
- North Korea warns South: We’ll attack ‘without warning’
Infertility treatments, massage care ‘essential’ in some states
Minimum coverage is a mixed bag
Question of the Day
Health insurance plans being set up in Kansas under President Obama’s health care law will have to cover infertility treatments, but those in Arkansas and Colorado won’t.
Maryland plans must cover weight-loss surgery, while those in Michigan have to pay for chiropractic care. Oregon plans won’t be forced to cover either of those – officials there say that covering such procedures would make premiums too expensive for most residents.
Twenty-two states and the District of Columbia have laid out what they consider to be the minimum coverage that must be made available to those obtaining insurance through small employers or the new state-based exchanges under the federal health care law.
Those states are grappling with the edges of medical care, debating whether infertility treatments, visits to chiropractors and time with massage therapists are considered “essential” in 21st-century medicine.
The law called for states to set rules for health care plans offered by small employers and plans offered under the state health care exchanges, where those without insurance will be able to shop for plans. The rules don’t apply to companies with 50 or more employees because those plans tend to already include a large range of benefits.
Called “essential health benefits” by the 2010 health care law, the mandatory coverage falls into 10 categories ranging from emergency services – which are covered by most insurers – to “habilitative services,” which are less commonly covered.
Some of the decisions were easy. Most states already have laws requiring coverage for diabetes or mental health care, for example. Some states included services that go above and beyond what is required by federal law – such as Washington, whose plan will cover massage therapists and doctors who specialize in natural remedies.
But states ran into trouble figuring out how to include some services that the federal law requires but have not traditionally been part of standard coverage. Among those is dental care for children, which is one of the essential health care benefits the plans must cover.
Because insurers typically offer separate dental plans, pediatric dental coverage wasn’t included in most of the benchmark plans the states selected. To solve the problem, most states tacked on supplemental dental plans, said Sonya Schwartz, director of the National Academy for State Health Policy.
“That’s one area where states had to spend a little extra time figuring out what to do,” Ms. Schwartz said.
Many of the states left a big question mark under the category of habilitative services – a broad category that is tough to define, though it usually includes trying to help those with disabilities learn language, physical skills or social skills.
“It was like, well, we don’t even know what those are,” said Linda Shepherd, who is overseeing implementation of the health care law for the Kansas Insurance Commission. “That was just an area that is sort of hanging out there.”
So Kansas and other states put the problem on hold, declining to issue any recommendations and hoping they eventually will receive more specific guidance from the administration.
As the clock ticks down to January 2014, when the plans must be ready for sale, some states are objecting to the entire exercise of setting benchmarks, saying they need more information from the federal government.
Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley, a staunch opponent of the health care law, announced Monday that his state won’t select essential health care benefits, saying it would be irresponsible without more guidance from the Department of Health and Human Services.
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
- A familiar fading feeling for McMahon in Connecticut
- Romney’s bid to undo health law faces hurdles
- Hill GOP presses Medicare probe
- Romney, Obama advisors butt heads over binders, Big Bird and “Romnesia”
- Outsiders abide by rules in Brown-Warren race
Latest Blog Entries
By Michael P. Orsi
Edward Snowden should declare his patriotism in court
- Huge backlash mounts over suspension of 'Duck Dynasty' star Phil Robertson
- Citing 'unfair system,' Obama commutes sentences for 8 crack offenders
- Deportations under Obama plunged to just 1 percent last year
- Homeland Security helps smuggle illegal immigrant children into the U.S.
- Gov't wasted $30 billion on 'pillownauts,' crystal goblets -- buying human urine!
- Sebelius adds yet another exemption for Obamacare
- Special ops vets slam military benefit cuts
- EDITORIAL: Red faces at the White House
- Obamacare 'pajamas boy' gets roundly mocked
- PRUDEN: 'Tis the season for apologies
Independent voices from the The Washington Times Communities
Southern Fried Politics from the Lens of a Persian-American Millennial
All of the world’s problems, solved on your back porch
Top 10 handguns in the U.S.
Extraordinary day at Redskins Park
White House pets gone wild!
Let it snow