H.R.1867 - To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to remove in-person requirements under Medicare for mental health services furnished through telehealth and telecommunications technology. (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R.1867 aims to amend Title XVIII of the Social Security Act to permanently remove in-person requirements for Medicare beneficiaries receiving mental health services via telehealth. This bill seeks to expand access to mental healthcare by allowing individuals to receive services remotely, regardless of their location. The bill addresses both substance use disorder and general mental health disorder treatments.
Expected Effects
The primary effect of this bill would be to broaden access to mental health services for Medicare recipients, particularly those in rural or underserved areas. It would make telehealth a more viable option for mental healthcare by removing previous restrictions. The bill also extends provisions for mental health visits furnished by Rural Health Clinics and Federally Qualified Health Centers.
Potential Benefits
- Increased access to mental healthcare, especially for individuals in rural or underserved areas.
- Greater convenience and flexibility for patients, potentially leading to improved adherence to treatment plans.
- Reduced transportation costs and time for patients.
- Potential for earlier intervention and diagnosis of mental health conditions.
- Modernization of Medicare to reflect advancements in telehealth technology.
Potential Disadvantages
- Potential for reduced quality of care due to the limitations of telehealth compared to in-person visits.
- Concerns about data privacy and security in telehealth settings.
- Possible increase in fraudulent billing practices.
- Exacerbation of the digital divide, as not all individuals have access to reliable internet or technology.
- Difficulty in establishing a strong therapeutic relationship through telehealth.
Constitutional Alignment
The bill aligns with the general welfare clause of the Constitution, as it seeks to improve access to healthcare for a specific population. While the Constitution does not explicitly address healthcare, the expansion of access to mental health services can be argued to promote the general well-being of citizens. The bill does not appear to infringe upon any specific constitutional rights or limitations.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).