3 ms·

In theory, it should be straightforward to validate if a halfway house is legit or not. Professional help offered generates fees through insurance charges which

by Mtinie 9y ago

In theory, it should be straightforward to validate if a halfway house is legit or not. Professional help offered generates fees through insurance charges which means income for the businesses that can be traced... ...so why am I so cynical about being optimistic for an actual consumer-beneficial outcome in cases like these?

ingenuous2 9y ago
It turns out, it's very hard to determine "legit" or not. Standard of care has not permeated much of the AA/NA [edit: treatment] culture. This is a heavily stigmatized group of people who frequently do not have the response reactions you or I might. Insurance companies like scans from MRI tests, not reports written from mental health consultants. These are some of our most vulnerable people. We need to take care of them. It's less competitive as a business to do so. [edit - like much of mental health issues, 'success' is difficult to define, so outcome based measurement is difficult.]
- honestoHeminway 9y ago
  It actually is. Request treatment documentation. If they screw that up, they will screw up treatment.
- Mtinie 9y ago
  Thank you for the response. In your opinion, in the facilities such as those discussed in the article and ones like them, would physical inspections address the more egregious cases? Are run down facilities, lack of sanitation, etc., enough to add a location (and operators) to an interstate "do not process insurance claims" blacklist? More regulation isn't the answer for everything, certainly, but as you stated, we are talking about exceptionally vulnerable people. Or is the stigma of addiction and mental health issues the root cause? Would this type of regulatory pressure be DOA because regulators, as people themselves, often believe addiction is a moral failing and not a health consideration?
  - ams6110 9y ago
    Who would do the inspecting? How do you qualify them? Who pays for it? How do you prevent bribes/payoffs?

by Mtinie 9y ago

ingenuous2 9y ago

It turns out, it's very hard to determine "legit" or not. Standard of care has not permeated much of the AA/NA [edit: treatment] culture. This is a heavily stigmatized group of people who frequently do not have the response reactions you or I might. Insurance companies like scans from MRI tests, not reports written from mental health consultants. These are some of our most vulnerable people. We need to take care of them. It's less competitive as a business to do so. [edit - like much of mental health issues, 'success' is difficult to define, so outcome based measurement is difficult.]

honestoHeminway 9y ago
It actually is. Request treatment documentation. If they screw that up, they will screw up treatment.
Mtinie 9y ago
Thank you for the response. In your opinion, in the facilities such as those discussed in the article and ones like them, would physical inspections address the more egregious cases? Are run down facilities, lack of sanitation, etc., enough to add a location (and operators) to an interstate "do not process insurance claims" blacklist? More regulation isn't the answer for everything, certainly, but as you stated, we are talking about exceptionally vulnerable people. Or is the stigma of addiction and mental health issues the root cause? Would this type of regulatory pressure be DOA because regulators, as people themselves, often believe addiction is a moral failing and not a health consideration?
- ams6110 9y ago
  Who would do the inspecting? How do you qualify them? Who pays for it? How do you prevent bribes/payoffs?