Mental health care: Access, stigma, and effectiveness.

Discusses the lack of commitment by the US as a nation to ensure that high-quality mental health care will be provided to all who are in need. The mental health benefits under Medicare and Medicaid programs are meager at best. Psychologists and other nonphysician health care providers are not considered bona fide professionals. Prevention, program evaluation efforts, and the use of alternatives to traditional inpatient care, such as halfway houses and crisis intervention programs, are not treated under the current reimbursement system. An "efficacy proposal" created by US Senators D. K. Inouye and S. M. Matsunaga is described. The essence of the proposal was modeled after the current Food and Drug Administration requirements for safety and efficacy for all new drugs and medical devices. In addition to these 2 requirements, the notion of "appropriateness" or "cost-effectiveness" was added. This proposal, which was deleted in 1980, would have established an interdisciplinary commission comprised of representatives of both the scientific and clinical communities. The commission would have been charged with the responsibility for making recommendations as to what types of mental health services, and under what conditions, should be reimbursed under the Social Security Act. It is concluded that the establishment of an independent entity with the charge of seriously reviewing the "probably public benefit" of providing psychotherapy would be in the national interest of the US. (5 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)