“SPECIAL ISSUE: Psychiatric/Substance Abuse/Alcoholism” HOW TO EXPAND BENEFITS AND NOT INCREASE OVERALL COSTS (Edward T. Gluckmann, M.S.)
SOME SIGNIFICANT CITATIONS
WHY N.J.’S DRGS MUST GO
SAMPLE OF COLLECTION FORMS USED BY NEW JERSEY HOSPITALS
America was again becoming aware that addictions due to drugs and alcohol were on the rise. That increase in awareness was manifested in the tremendous personal and social expense and was felt most heavily on the self-insured funds which were just emerging from the old concept that addiction was a criminal activity and should not be covered by insurance. The public health policies were transforming drug and alcohol addiction from criminal to civil identification. But whatever the stance, addiction in the minds of most was related to illegal drugs and not to alcohol or prescription medications. Notwithstanding the position of fund administrators, fund counsels and advisers, the economic toll was great. Addicts had other covered illnesses and injuries. The problem would not go away as self-insured funds faced increasing expenses and limited income and resources.
In this issue of The Fund Reporter CCAHS sought to address benefit costs for substance abuse. In a similar fashion, it addressed psychiatric benefit issues which also still labored under old school ideas: you have to be crazy to see a psychiatrist and crazy people should get a little care and then take care of themselves.
Other articles provided reasons why the DRG system in New Jersey should be ended.