Psychiatric Services
Journal Home Search Current Issue Past Issues Subscribe All APPI Journals Help Contact Us
 
Quicksearch
Advanced Search
Or Search All APPI Journals
This Article
* Alert me when this article is cited
* Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
* Email this article to a Colleague
* Similar articles in this journal
* Alert me to new issues of the journal
* Add to My Articles & Searches
* Download to citation manager
* reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
* Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
* Articles by Hughes, W. C.
* Search for Related Content
PubMed
* Articles by Hughes, W. C.
Related Collections
* Cross-Cultural Psychiatry
* Chronically Mentally Ill Patients
* Financing of Programs
* Other Ethics Issues
* Health Policy and Legislation
* Hospitals, Hospital Treatment
* American Psychiatric Association Activities
* Antisocial Personality Disorders
* Borderline Personality Disorders
Psychiatr Serv 55:192-193, February 2004
© 2004 American Psychiatric Association


Letters

A Single Funding Source for Public-Sector Care

In Reply: I join Dr. Kuehn in doubting that clinicians will ever see single-payer funding—even those in my age group (late 40s). However, with any luck, we may be able to radio the Carpathia and stop rearranging deck chairs aboard a mental health system fraught with Titanic inefficiency.

Unless there is a resurgence of "treatment" interventions sanctioned in Nazi Germany, we will have to continue providing citizens who have mental illness with subsistence-level support and health care (1). Any move to renege on disability payments, and we're right back to the 1950s, providing custodial care. I agree with Dr. Kuehn that reform on the state level can be accomplished; however, there are significant barriers. Mental health authorities, either local or centralized, tend to function, as Dr. Kuehn points out, as a welfare program for administrators.

Whether administered by a central authority or local boards, the provision of clinical care has shifted from state and county governments to nonprofit agencies over the past ten to 15 years. Recently, the nonprofits have boarded the compensation gravy train made famous by Fortune 500 companies. Consequently, we have administrators at nonprofit mental health centers making two to nine times the salary that they would receive as a clinician who actually provides services. In my home state of Missouri, the director of psychiatric services for the state department of mental health is paid less than 21 of the 25 directors of private mental health centers, some of whom are paid two to four times as much. Politicians are not blind to such public-to-private largesse, and the ideologists among them, who know nothing of treatment issues, have apparently decided to starve us out.

My experience has been with a highly centralized state authority, and local boards are therefore appealing. Dr. Kuehn, on the other hand, advocates for the opposite—funneling all available funding into a central mental health authority. Perils are inherent in either model, and currently each state is free to decide how to configure its system.

This discussion would be moot if Harry Truman had succeeded in 1946 with his national health plan that promised that Americans would receive health care "just as they do now" (2). His bill was denounced as "socialistic," as was the Clinton plan in 1994. Recent Medicare legislation is yet another reminder that as health care becomes more privatized, marketized, and uncoordinated, persons with serious mental illness will be shortchanged.

Had I been in Dr. Hogan's shoes, given a mandate for a "budget neutral" New Freedom Commission report, my resignation would have been submitted the next day. If we have no hope of a single-payer system, or even of consolidating all of the federal funding directed to mental health services, state governments will have to create their own unitary funding streams and do a radically better job of expending dollars on direct care—and also find additional funds somehow.

The share of state budgets devoted to mental health has declined precipitously in the last three decades, and although some savings were realized by closing large institutions, atypical antipsychotics, independent housing, and assertive community programs are costly as well. Sadly, bureaucrats and politicians have learned that patients are more readily underfunded when they are in the gutter than when they are in a hospital accredited by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations.

William C. Hughes, M.S.W., L.C.S.W.

References

  1. Hassenfield IN: Doctor-patient relations in Nazi Germany and the fate of psychiatric patients. Psychiatric Quarterly 73:183–194, 2002
  2. Starr P: The Social Transformation of American Medicine: The Rise of a Sovereign Profession and the Making of a Vast Industry. New York, Basic Books, 1982




This Article
* Alert me when this article is cited
* Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
* Email this article to a Colleague
* Similar articles in this journal
* Alert me to new issues of the journal
* Add to My Articles & Searches
* Download to citation manager
* reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
* Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
* Articles by Hughes, W. C.
* Search for Related Content
PubMed
* Articles by Hughes, W. C.
Related Collections
* Cross-Cultural Psychiatry
* Chronically Mentally Ill Patients
* Financing of Programs
* Other Ethics Issues
* Health Policy and Legislation
* Hospitals, Hospital Treatment
* American Psychiatric Association Activities
* Antisocial Personality Disorders
* Borderline Personality Disorders


Get information about faster international access.

Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2004 American Psychiatric Association. All rights reserved.

Home | Search | Current Issue | Past Issues | Subscribe | All APPI Journals | Help | Contact Us

American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc. American Psychiatric Association
1000 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1825, Arlington, VA 22209-3901 * 800-368-5777 * appi at psych.org