What has been the reaction then to the Interim Final Rule in the past couple of months?
KA: I would say that the reaction has been very mixed. The effort to achieve parity in mental health and substance use disorder benefits, as we all know, have been a long and hard fought battle. For those who need care and for the providers who dedicate themselves wholeheartedly offering the best care possible they have to give, MHPAEA was obviously a great cause for celebration. The law does also have a number of ambiguities sort of baked into it however, and those are of necessity reflected in the Interim Final Rule. So, for those who act as an offer care I think they may have preferred greater clarity around scope of services, etcetera. The payor standpoint is quite different. We have to understand that those plans — self insured employers, managed care plans, HMS — that they’re all starting from very different points of departure in looking at parity. For those that were already veteran parity administrators, you know for example if they are located in states with parity laws simil
