Today I want to give you a closer look at a story that fell, in my opinion, pretty under the radar when it happened given the impact it could have on plans, providers, and patients.
Mental health parity statutes require, very generally, that health plans must provide the same level of coverage for mental health and substance use disorder benefits as they do for medical and surgical benefits. So for example, if a plan has a $30 copay for a doctor’s visit for a cold, it should also have the same copay for a mental health visit.
If there’s a limit to the number of times you can visit the physical therapist per year (and who hasn’t hit that if you’re over 30 years of age) there shouldn’t be a lower limit for mental health. The basic federal law addressing this was the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act, which was passed in 2008, followed by a couple of final rules implementing the provisions.
The most recent final rule was in 2024 under President Biden, and reportedly quote “put some teeth into the 2008 act.” This finalized standards for determining network composition and out-of-network reimbursement rates, added protections against non-quantitative treatment limitations – or NQTLs – in coverage, specified that benefits had to be meaningful, and prohibited plans from using biased information and sources when designing and applying a treatment limitation. At the time, a representative from the American Hospital Association(AHA) praised the regulations as necessary for guidance in reducing administrative burden for providers.
This past May, however, the Departments of Labor, HHS, and the Treasury announced that they will no longer enforce the 2024 final rule and will be conducting a reexamination of each department’s “enforcement approach” to the Mental Health Parity laws more generally. The final 2024 rule is the subject of a lawsuit by the ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC) which argues that the new rule is arbitrary and beyond the scope of the departments’ authority.
The departments have asked that the litigation be paused as they reevaluate the 2024 rule and consider whether to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking which, they say, will either rescind or modify the 2024 final rule. They will not enforce any part of the rule until a court decision is released-and for 18 months thereafter.
The departments also suggested states take the same approach as the feds by not enforcing the 2024 final rule if they’ve passed mirroring versions.
States have been generally considered the main enforcers of mental health parity laws, as they’re responsible for state-regulated plans and have often expanded their state laws beyond the federal law to meet the needs of their citizens. As of earlier this year, noncompliance has been “widespread” according to a Department of Labor (DOL) report filed with Congress in January, even though the report noted that plans were quickly fixing problems.
Many states passed their own parity laws before the 2024 rule. But a handful have adopted regulations or laws reflective of this 2024 rule. And regardless of which version they’ve passed, states often take enforcement seriously. Georgia’s attorney general, for example AG announced just this Friday that 22 insurers in the state are being slapped with fines totaling $20 million for over six thousand violations of Georgia’s 2022 law.
What does this mean for the future? As I mentioned, this non-enforcement announcement went fairly under the radar back in May. We haven’t really seen comment on it from the industry, states or health plans. As the Trump Administration begins to actively reevaluate its approach to mental health parity laws generally, I think we may see a lot more industry discussion on what’s needed and what’s not-as well as states readdressing their own parity laws based on the outcome. So keep an eye on the news this fall!
EDITOR’S NOTE:
The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of MedLearn Media. We provide a platform for diverse perspectives, but the content and opinions expressed herein are the author’s own. MedLearn Media does not endorse or guarantee the accuracy of the information presented. Readers are encouraged to critically evaluate the content and conduct their own research. Any actions taken based on this article are at the reader’s own discretion.
Coders may very well feel that they have no impact on hospitals under H.R.1, the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA). Just the opposite
Hotly anticipated performance targets and payment amounts for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Advancing Chronic Care with Effective, Scalable Solutions (ACCESS) Model
Please log in to your account to comment on this article.
Sepsis sequencing continues to challenge even experienced coding and CDI professionals, with evolving guidelines, documentation gaps, and payer scrutiny driving denials and data inconsistencies. In this webcast, Payal Sinha, MBA, RHIA, CCDS, CDIP, CCS, CCS-P, CCDS-O, CRC, CRCR, provides clear guideline-based strategies to accurately code sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock, assign POA indicators, clarify the relationship between infection and organ dysfunction, and align documentation across teams. Attendees will gain practical tools to strengthen audit defensibility, improve first-pass accuracy, support appeal success, reduce denials, and ensure accurate quality reporting, empowering organizations to achieve consistent, compliant sepsis coding outcomes.
Expert presenters Kathy Pride, RHIT, CPC, CCS-P, CPMA, and Brandi Russell, RHIA, CCS, COC, CPMA, break down complex fracture care coding rules, walk through correct modifier application (-25, -57, 54, 55), and clarify sequencing for initial and subsequent encounters. Attendees will gain the practical knowledge needed to submit clean claims, ensure compliance, and stay one step ahead of payer audits in 2026.
Accurately determining the principal diagnosis is critical for compliant billing, appropriate reimbursement, and valid quality reporting — yet it remains one of the most subjective and error-prone areas in inpatient coding. In this expert-led session, Cheryl Ericson, RN, MS, CCDS, CDIP, demystifies the complexities of principal diagnosis assignment, bridging the gap between coding rules and clinical reality. Learn how to strengthen your organization’s coding accuracy, reduce denials, and ensure your documentation supports true medical necessity.
Denials continue to delay reimbursement, increase administrative burden, and threaten financial stability across healthcare organizations. This essential webcast tackles the root causes—rising payer scrutiny, fragmented workflows, inconsistent documentation, and underused analytics—and offers proven, data-driven strategies to prevent and overturn denials. Attendees will gain practical tools to strengthen documentation and coding accuracy, engage clinicians effectively, and leverage predictive analytics and AI to identify risks before they impact revenue. Through real-world case examples and actionable guidance, this session empowers coding, CDI, and revenue cycle professionals to shift from reactive appeals to proactive denial prevention and revenue protection.
In this timely session, Stacey Shillito, CDIP, CPMA, CCS, CCS-P, CPEDC, COPC, breaks down the complexities of Medical Decision Making (MDM) documentation so providers can confidently capture the true complexity of their care. Attendees will learn practical, efficient strategies to ensure documentation aligns with current E/M guidelines, supports accurate coding, and reduces audit risk, all without adding to charting time.
Join Ronald Hirsch, MD, FACP, CHCQM for The PEPPER Returns – Risk and Opportunity at Your Fingertips, a practical webcast that demystifies the PEPPER and shows you how to turn complex claims data into actionable insights. Dr. Hirsch will explain how to interpret key measures, identify compliance risks, uncover missed revenue opportunities, and understand new updates in the PEPPER, all to help your organization stay ahead of audits and use this powerful data proactively.
Stay ahead of the 2026-2027 audit surge with “Top 10 Audit Targets for 2026-2027 for Hospitals & Physicians: Protect Your Revenue,” a high-impact webcast led by Michael Calahan, PA, MBA. This concise session gives hospitals and physicians clear insight into the most likely federal audit targets, such as E/M services, split/shared and critical care, observation and admissions, device credits, and Two-Midnight Rule changes, and shows how to tighten documentation, coding, and internal processes to reduce denials, recoupments, and penalties. Attendees walk away with practical best practices to protect revenue, strengthen compliance, and better prepare their teams for inevitable audits.
As AI reshapes healthcare compliance, the risk of biased outputs and opaque decision-making grows. This webcast, led by Frank Cohen, delivers a practical Four-Pillar Governance Framework—Transparency, Accountability, Fairness, and Explainability—to help you govern AI-driven claim auditing with confidence. Learn how to identify and mitigate bias, implement robust human oversight, and document defensible AI review processes that regulators and auditors will accept. Discover concrete remedies, from rotation protocols to uncertainty scoring, and actionable steps to evaluate vendors before contracts are signed. In a regulatory landscape that moves faster than ever, gain the tools to stay compliant, defend your processes, and reduce liability while maintaining operational effectiveness.
Happy National Doctor’s Day! Learn how to get a complimentary webcast on ‘Decoding Social Admissions’ as a token of our heartfelt appreciation! Click here to learn more →
CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 1 with code CYBER25
CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 2 with code CYBER24
