The Washington Times
No to mental-health parity bill
Psychiatrist Thomas Szasz hits the nail on the head ("Thumbs on the
parity scale for psychiatrists," Commentary, Dec. 9). The House of
Representatives should not pass the parity bill for several reasons.
First, mental illness is a disease metaphorically, but not literally.
If it was a real brain disease, standard textbooks on pathology would
recognize it as such.
Second, if the parity bill is passed, people with real diseases will be
deprived of needed insurance coverage. Insurance companies will be forced to
pay to treat people with ethical problems, not medical problems. People with
"mental illness" can control their behavior, and in many cases they don't
even want "treatment."
Third, the parity bill smacks of socialism. Government has no business
dictating what insurance companies sell. If it was cost effective to cover
the treatment of mental illness, insurance companies would already do so.
Parity for mental illness, however, is not cost effective. Therefore,
insurance customers will bear the burden via higher premiums if the parity
bill is passed.
Finally, it is worth noting that criticism of this bill is rarely
heard. For the House to make an informed decision, they should first study
the arguments contesting the idea that mental illness even exists. Why are
other newspapers too frightened to publish opinions critical of the bill?
JEFFREY A. SCHALER
Tuesday, December 11, 2001
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
The Washington Times
Letters to the Editor
December 11, 2001
Washington
Jeffrey A. Schaler is adjunct professor at the School of Public Affairs
of American University.
