My professional associations fought for years to become approved Medicare providers, and, in January 2024, this will come to pass.

I won’t be signing on.

The primary reason, and one that is sufficient unto itself, is that I do not work with any insurance. Having a vast bureaucracy wedge itself between my clients and me, forcing me to diagnose grief as a mental disorder (for example), and to pathologize the search for meaning as life takes its confusing twists and turns, is against the principles under which I trained for this profession. To be alive entails suffering; to help those who suffer is not necessarily something that can be reduced to diagnostic and intervention codes. I can do cognitive-behavioral therapy and other science-based work without reducing the client and the heartache to a series of codes.

There are other reasons, which, if the simple fact of not working with insurance were not sufficient, would add weight to the argument.

It would limit my clients’ options. Some people want to self-pay for services, and if they have Medicare, and I have contracted with Medicare, I can no longer offer them that option. The rules would impose limits around what I can and cannot do, even when it does not cost Medicare anything.

Second, it would complicate my practice. As with all insurance companies, an online billing process for electronic submission would be necessary. My simple process of recording of payment and making a bank deposit would be replaced by electronically keeping track of what was paid, what is outstanding, what requires additional documentation or some other time-consuming and frustrating process, copays and coinsurance and deductibles.  A conservative guess would be an additional five hours a week spent in this process, five hours that I believe would be better spent with a client or two, a professional training, a walk in the park.

Finally, there is the issue of insult. I am presuming that the Medicare per-session reimbursement for either of my professions, Mental Health Counseling and Marriage & Family Therapy, will be the same as Clinical Social Workers. It is my understanding this is the case with third party payors. With this as the expectation, then, by accepting the terms of Medicare, I would be acquiescing to the bizarre notion that my work as a psychotherapist is only about three-quarters the value of a clinical psychologist’s work. Of course, there are many clinical psychologists far more skilled than I; on the other hand, after many years in the field, I do not agree that any randomly selected clinical psychologist is necessarily my superior as a psychotherapist.

It is not the money; I work on a sliding scale, based on household income, and, as you might imagine, a number of my clients pay considerably less than Medicare would.  However, the arrangements I have with God give me a sense of peace, not injustice.  A client who pays me less because she is in poverty is part of my relationship with the Lord; an insurance company that pays me less because people who do not understand my profession have, via a dart board or an indolent board room debate or perhaps a roll of the die, have decided thus is tyrannical injustice; “Because we said so.”

So, while many in my profession are exuberant, feeling validated that our profession has achieved recognition on par with other mental health professionals, I shrug. If this makes them happy, I am glad for them. I hope that the process is fair and that my misgivings will turn out to be unwarranted.

But I won’t be signing on.