Posted by pegasus on February 10, 2005, at 17:21:53
In reply to T's billing policies--moral?, posted by smokeymadison on February 10, 2005, at 12:38:46
In my experience, most Ts around here prefer not to deal directly with insurance. And I personally don't think that they're morally obligated to deal directly with insurance, or that it's morally wrong for them to expect to get paid for the work they do at the time that they do it. I know that those of us struggling with mental illness issues sometimes have a harder time dealing with administrative hassles and financial stress than other folks. But on the other hand, I also think it's darn hard work to be a T, and I don't see why it's fair to expect them to suffer the delay in my insurance's payments so I don't have to. They're delivering their side of the bargain in a timely manner. How I pay for it - if that's through insurance or my own dime - is really my own issue, IMHO.
Although when I write that out, it sounds like I'm saying that I don't think anyone is entitled to free therapy. But actually, I think we're all entitled to good mental health. Wouldn't it be great if there was just a therapy fairy that doled out appropriate therapy to all of us?
On the other hand, I've heard discussions about how it's actually good for the client to have to accept the burden of paying for therapy. Because then they have to make the decision that it's valuable to them. Otherwise, I guess there might be some danger that they wouldn't be very invested in it, or wouldn't recognize the value of it to them.
Which reminds me of a friend who's been through years of psychoanalysis, who said that she owns a mansion . . . inside her. She meant that she's invested so much in therapy and it has had a big effect on her financial status. But it was all worth it, because she has the mansion (=personal mental health and insight) that she really wanted.
pegasus
poster:pegasus
thread:455868
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20050206/msgs/456003.html