Search This Site




Philadelphia Weekly - The Trouble With Spikol


 

 

 

 

Cost of the War in Iraq
(JavaScript Error)

 

 

« Yum yum: debate continued | Main | And that's our last word on the subject! »

Just cutting and pasting, people

md29008m.jpg

In our ongoing debate about psych meds, Joe writes:

The paradox is that "medication management" may be the only "care" persons seeking outpatient services can access. It is the perfect storm - an underfunded, under-resourced mental health system attempting to cope with an ever increasing service population where complex human issues are addressed by medication alone. The situation is made worse when consumer expectations including expected outcomes are largely driven by false representations. Services are often claimed to be available on demand, comprehensive, culturally competent, effective, evidenced based and predicated on the principles of wellness and recovery. One merely need reach out for help and all will be provided, not.

Medication is simply a tool which is neither appropriate nor effective for everyone. (See both the CATIE and STAR*D studies.) Moreover, strict reliance on medication is antithetical to representations of consumer empowerment and consumer choice. There are too many personal issues and needs that can't be medicated away. There has yet to be a medication that cures loneliness, provides a hug when one is sorely needed, houses the homeless, resolves family, workplace or social issues, raises self esteem, fosters a sense of self worth, and so forth.

[Image of a real vintage Thorazine ad from Deco Dog's Ephemera. In the first panel, the guy is in the hospital. In the second panel, he's so frickin' happy to be home on Thorazine, he's willing to hold yarn for the woman he lives with -- probably his mom.]

Comments

Without meaning to exonerate the "drug pushers" (and in full disclosure, I actually had a good friend at one point who was a pharma rep, albeit not for psychopharmalogical drugs), IMHO this is more an insurance industry problem than a Big Pharma problem.

In my experience, and those of other mental health consumers I know, insurance companies are overjoyed to pay for prescriptions -- even those whose list cost (which, granted, the insurance companies don't pay) is frighteningly high.

Yet they are penurious to a fault in refusing to pay for more than one therapy and psychiatry visit per month -- if they pay for that.

Do the math. If more focused therapy and psychiatric monitoring, every two weeks instead of once a month, could help a consumer drop from, say, 5 or 6 medications to 2 or 3 (and let's say one of the three dropped is the most expensive medication), THE INSURANCE COMPANY WOULD PROBABLY SAVE MONEY, or at worst break even. (It's not like those infamous "usual and customary" rates for insurance companies don't apply for doc visits as well as prescriptions.)

How self-defeating is that for the insurance company -- let alone the consumer?!

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

About

self portrait web final.JPG

Liz Spikol is senior contributing editor of Philadelphia Weekly. She writes the award-winning column The Trouble With Spikol, which began as a chronicle of her struggle with mental illness, and has since expanded into humorous musings on everything from graphic novels to how to use a mop. She also writes the paper's book review column, Lit Gloss. This blog -- named one of the Top 10 Bipolar Blogs of 2007 by PsychCentral -- is about mental illness policy, news, personal journeys and more.