I always start anything about Jackson Miller by saying that even though I don't agree with him, he is one of the more personable and accessible people in the General Assembly. When kids in his district make Honor Roll, they get a letter from him. Jimmy did too. At one point, he supported mandated health insurance for autistic children. I assume it must have been party or donation or something, because he voted against the insurance mandate last year. He now touts his support of small business instead of families of autism, which is sad, because he knows several of us. Mercifully the bill passed... even though it didn't cover Jimmy, it is something for children of the ages between 2-6.
I am not in his district anymore, which is sort of mixed blessing. He is competent. He is direct for the most part. When he is being political, he will tell you why he is. That's a whole lot better than many politicians. But I wish Jackson's heart could be as good in Richmond as I know it is up here in Manassas. That's my biggest gripe about him. Maybe someday he will be part of expanding the coverage for children with autism. Maybe someday he will see Jimmy again and be moved to help him.
6 comments:
Just an FYI,
If Obamacare goes through and is enacted, it may completely eliminate the autism treatment bills that individual states have already approved. If the bill does not deem the treatment to be essential, then the state can say that since there is no federal coverage, or funding for coverage, it is an elective procedure and the state will not cover the costs.
Just something to think about.
Chuck
I read that too. Many problems with that. I hope that the federal government will include autism treatment as an essential benefit. I think it is politically untenable for them not to in an election year. We are a minority as parents and grandparents of autistic people, but we are a growing, vocal, and voting minority.
You are hoping for the federal government will do the right thing? Go buy a lottery ticket.
Chuck
Same thing could be said of the Commonwealth of Virginia, the health insurance companies, or any of these other big entities we fight collectively as parents. That doesn't mean the fight isn't worth it.
Come on, Chuck. Wouldn't you find it somewhat gratifying if therapeutic treatment for autism made the essential benefits list?
Insurance companies do not have the human resources to supply the services. So the insurance companies will hire therapists from the school systems, where they help older children for longer periods of time, or they will hire newly trained therapists with absolutely no field experience whatsoever.
The next problem is who will be able to provide better pay/benefits to therapists, schools or insurance companies? In order to supply the services, the insurance companies will have to entice the trained and licensed therapists away from their current employer. Who do you think will be better able to increase expenses for pay and benefits quickly to appropriate levels ?
Most likely public schools will lose their most trained therapists to insurance companies due to better pay, better benefits, and no IEP issues to deal with, in a professional office environment. So now all those students over the age of 6 will not have a therapist to meet the school’s IEP requirements for services. What will happen to them? Increased numbers of due process hearings, increased expenses to adequately supply services to meet IEP’s for current students in public schools. If the insurance companies supply better pay/benefits then the schools will be forced to meet IEP requirements with inexperienced or substandard therapist for all their students ages 6-21.
My final parting shot, what percentage of ASD children that receive professional, well executed therapy from license therapists retain what they learned in therapy after the therapy stops at the age of 6? Everything that is valuable, important, and worthwhile that my son has achieved didn’t even start to flourish until the age of 10.
The insurance gambit, even if executed under Obamacare, is substandard and robs Peter to pay Paul in the short run and does very little in the long run. We received therapy from an insurance provider. It wasn’t worthwhile to continue, so we stopped.
Chuck
A prefix to my previous post:
Since the Insurance companies are not mandated by law to provide services to everyone and they do not have the human resources to provide the services currently, they will simply deny the services to all that request them.
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/AS-NV/message/23647
Chuck
Post a Comment