Email a Friend
Print Article
If Insurance Paid for Marital and Relationship Therapy...
You may not know that most health insurers do not pay for marital (and relationship) therapy. A relationship that is in trouble does not constitute a medical condition - even though it can have a lot of impact on people. So, if it's not a medical condition, no coverage.
Unless a couple is using a Flex Spending Account (also often called a "cafeteria plan"), into which they have put pre-taxed dollars, they most often cannot pay for their couples therapy with anything except their own after-tax money. Most insurance companies require a mental health diagnosis to cover therapy. This forces mental health professionals into labels that can be arbitrary and not the best description of what is going on.
All the way around, this is unfortunate - especially financially. A study in the Journal of Marital and Family Therapy (7, 2007) found that insurance companies who covered the screening and treatment of marital distress would probably save much more money than they spent. This would mean more money for therapists, lower premiums for clients, and improved relationships for many trouble couples.
Where do the savings come from? It turns out that people use medical healthcare services less after receiving therapy for their relationship problems. One study found that the average couple who went to therapy reduced their use of healthcare more than 20% in the six months following their therapy - regardless of how successful the therapy was! According to this study by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, healthcare costs average over $7,000 per person per year in the U.S. So, anything that lowers that expenditure by 20% can add up to a lot of saved money for insurance companies.
So, the question was asked, "Is it worthwhile for insurance companies to pay for relationship therapy?" According to Ben Caldwell, the author of the study in the Jouranl of Marital and Family Therapy, the answer is affirmative. It turns out that if health insurance companies paid for therapy for distressed couples, they would save up to $1.48 in later healthcare costs for every $1 they spent.
So, why are things the way they are? Insurance companies need to be convinced that couples therapy can be effective - even as a short term option - and that it will add to their profits. Research that supports this position is starting to emerge. And relationship therapy methods and approaches are continually being refined and honed to offer greater gain for the couple.
The study also found out that tax payers would save money too if marital distress screening and treatment were paid for through governmental sources. A study conducted in Utah found that the taxpayer cost of a single divorce is conservatively estimated at $30,000. This was calculated in direct costs such as food stamps and indirect costs such as more police to combat an increase in crime. If government agencies paid for the cost of marital therapy at about $2,000, every divorce that was avoided would return about $30,000. Even if only 16% of the couples identified as being in distress went on to get therapy, the government would still break even.
This is a no-brainer.
Related Topics: Technorati Tags: marital therapy, relationship therapy, health insurance, sexual health
Unless a couple is using a Flex Spending Account (also often called a "cafeteria plan"), into which they have put pre-taxed dollars, they most often cannot pay for their couples therapy with anything except their own after-tax money. Most insurance companies require a mental health diagnosis to cover therapy. This forces mental health professionals into labels that can be arbitrary and not the best description of what is going on.
All the way around, this is unfortunate - especially financially. A study in the Journal of Marital and Family Therapy (7, 2007) found that insurance companies who covered the screening and treatment of marital distress would probably save much more money than they spent. This would mean more money for therapists, lower premiums for clients, and improved relationships for many trouble couples.
Where do the savings come from? It turns out that people use medical healthcare services less after receiving therapy for their relationship problems. One study found that the average couple who went to therapy reduced their use of healthcare more than 20% in the six months following their therapy - regardless of how successful the therapy was! According to this study by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, healthcare costs average over $7,000 per person per year in the U.S. So, anything that lowers that expenditure by 20% can add up to a lot of saved money for insurance companies.
So, the question was asked, "Is it worthwhile for insurance companies to pay for relationship therapy?" According to Ben Caldwell, the author of the study in the Jouranl of Marital and Family Therapy, the answer is affirmative. It turns out that if health insurance companies paid for therapy for distressed couples, they would save up to $1.48 in later healthcare costs for every $1 they spent.
So, why are things the way they are? Insurance companies need to be convinced that couples therapy can be effective - even as a short term option - and that it will add to their profits. Research that supports this position is starting to emerge. And relationship therapy methods and approaches are continually being refined and honed to offer greater gain for the couple.
The study also found out that tax payers would save money too if marital distress screening and treatment were paid for through governmental sources. A study conducted in Utah found that the taxpayer cost of a single divorce is conservatively estimated at $30,000. This was calculated in direct costs such as food stamps and indirect costs such as more police to combat an increase in crime. If government agencies paid for the cost of marital therapy at about $2,000, every divorce that was avoided would return about $30,000. Even if only 16% of the couples identified as being in distress went on to get therapy, the government would still break even.
This is a no-brainer.
Related Topics: Technorati Tags: marital therapy, relationship therapy, health insurance, sexual health
0 Comments:
Post a Comment