IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Parity for Mental Health and Substance Abuse Care Under Managed Care


  • Richard G. Frank
  • Thomas G. McGuire


Background: Parity in insurance coverage for mental health and substance abuse has been a key goal of mental health and substance abuse care advocates in the United States during most of the past 20 years. The push for parity began during the era of indemnity insurance and fee for service payment when benefit design was the main rationing device in health care. The central economic argument for enacting legislation aimed at regulating the insurance benefit was to address market failure stemming from adverse selection. The case against parity was based on inefficiency related to moral hazard. Empirical analyses provided evidence that ambulatory mental health services were considerably more responsive to the terms of insurance than were ambulatory medical services. Aims: Our goal in this research is to reexamine the economics of parity in the light of recent changes in the delivery of health care in the United States. Specifically managed care has fundamentally altered the way in which health services are rationed. Benefit design is now only one mechanism among many that are used to allocate health care resources and control costs. We examine the implication of these changes for policies aimed at achieving parity in insurance coverage. Method: We develop a theoretical approach to characterizing rationing under managed care. We then analyze the traditional efficiency concerns in insurance, adverse selection and moral hazard in the context of policy aimed at regulating health and mental health benefits under private insurance. Results: We show that since managed care controls and utilization in new ways Parity in benefit design no longer implies equal access to and quality of mental health and substance abuse care. Because costs are controlled by management under managed care and not primarily by out of pocket prices paid by consumers, demand response recedes as an efficiency argument against parity. At the same time parity in benefit design may accomplish less with respect to providing a remedy to problems related to adverse selection.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard G. Frank & Thomas G. McGuire, 1998. "Parity for Mental Health and Substance Abuse Care Under Managed Care," NBER Working Papers 6838, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:6838
    Note: HC HE

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Sargent, Thomas J, 1971. "A Note on the 'Accelerationist' Controversy," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 3(3), pages 721-725, August.
    2. Douglas O. Staiger & James H. Stock & Mark W. Watson, 1997. "How Precise Are Estimates of the Natural Rate of Unemployment?," NBER Chapters,in: Reducing Inflation: Motivation and Strategy, pages 195-246 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Ettner, Susan L. & M. Harwood, Jessica & Thalmayer, Amber & Ong, Michael K. & Xu, Haiyong & Bresolin, Michael J. & Wells, Kenneth B. & Tseng, Chi-Hong & Azocar, Francisca, 2016. "The Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act evaluation study: Impact on specialty behavioral health utilization and expenditures among “carve-out” enrollees," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 131-143.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:6838. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.