First, S.7000 repeals some of the 2006 nondiscrimination protections.
Second, S.7000 does not specify any treatments that must be covered as is done in many other states. Instead, S.7000 establishes a cumbersome process by which four state agencies with differing agendas are to decide which treatments health insurers must cover — a determination that will override local doctors' prescriptions for other medically necessary treatments.
Third, S.7000 sets an unreasonable three-part standard for the four state agencies to apply — tougher than any other in the country — that appears to exclude almost all of the standard treatments that our kids regularly receive.
Fourth, S.7000 may complicate the counties' ongoing efforts to recover insurance reimbursements for taxpayer-funded autism treatments in Early Intervention programs.
Search This Blog
Saturday, July 31, 2010
The Case Against the New York Bill
A previous post described a positive view of the mandate bill that the New York Legislature has sent to Governor Paterson. The Autism Action Coalition, a New York group that takes an antivaccination stance, opposes the measure. Thomas Abinanti, an autism dad and Westchester County legislator who has also raised concerns about vaccines, makes the case against the bill: