How UnitedHealth’s Playbook for Limiting Mental Health Coverage Puts Countless Americans’ Treatment at Risk
Reporting Highlights
- An Insurer Sanctioned: Three states found United’s algorithmic system to limit mental health coverage illegal; when they fought it, the insurer agreed to restrict it.
- A Patchwork Problem: The company is policing mental health care with arbitrary thresholds and cost-driven targets, highlighting a key flaw in the U.S. regulatory structure.
- United’s Playbook Revealed: The poorest and most vulnerable patients are now most at risk of losing mental health care coverage as United targets them for cost savings.
An article from a month ago about United Heathcares problematic coverage, which I believe is relevant again.
First Walz L Ive seen. SAD!
No Democrat is going to endorse or sanction a murder. If you don’t believe in the death penalty, you can’t defend this guy’s murder, and politicians are supposed to sound all responsible-like.
It’s not an internally consistent position, but my morality doesn’t have to be strictly defined and codified into laws. Someone responsible for making laws kinda has to do their best at advocating that those laws represent absolutely morality.
We here are under no such expectations. You should never assault someone, but if that someone is a Nazi I’m buying you a beer. If someone murders a CEO responsible for death and misery, murder is still wrong, but perhaps less wrong than in other cases. I’m not losing sleep.
Walz could have just said “tragic loss of human life” and not try to get sympathy for the healthcare industry.
Why I’m a utilitarian. Morals need to be a little flexible to be able to account for all situations. I believe in the greater good.