Mental health advocates discuss shortage of resources in Michigan
LANSING, Mich. (WLNS) — Mental health advocates met at Sparrow Hospital in Lansing Wednesday in hopes of highlighting the needs of patients for critical infrastructure, long-term hospital beds, and emergency resources to help with the overall improvement of behavioral health.
'It's hard to see patients, particularly the pediatric patients, but also adults and all patients that come through here that are not able to get that kind of care they need in the long-term in the community through the additional behavioral health beds,' said Chief Medical Officer of UM Health Sparrow Dr. Chandu Vemuri.
State lawmakers and local health officials say Michigan currently ranks 46th in the nation in behavioral health resources, offering five psychiatric beds per 100,000 people.
'That's countless families waiting on what can be life-saving care.. In an emergency situation, every second, staff member, and room availability matters,' said State Representative Angela Witwer.
Officials say the lack of resources has overwhelmed emergency departments, creating another hurdle between patients and quality health services.
'Last year, for over 18 months, we collected data from our hospitals and health systems that told us that on any given day, there are more than 155 patients that are stuck in emergency departments across the state that are looking for behavioral health services,' said Lauren Lapine, Senior Director of the Michigan Health and Hospital Association. 'And honestly, that's a pretty conservative estimate.'
Medicaid beneficiaries are among the most impacted, with one in every three Medicaid patients waiting more than two days in emergency departments for care, according to health officials.
'The patients that are Medicaid beneficiaries in state law have to work with a local community mental health agency, and that adds an additional layer of complexity for patients,' Lapine said.
Health care officials say policy changes and key investments in critical treatment options are still needed to improve behavioral health services.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What's a Medicaid cut? Senate GOP tiptoes around $800B question
When is a Medicaid cut not actually a cut? That's the $800 billion question facing Senate Republicans as they write their own version of the sweeping House-passed tax and spending bill. Administration officials and senators defending against attacks on the bill have coalesced around a message that there will be no cuts to benefits, and the only people who will lose coverage are the ones who never deserved it to begin with: namely immigrants without legal status and 'able-bodied' individuals who shouldn't be on Medicaid. 'This bill will preserve and protect the programs, the social safety net, but it will make it much more commonsense,' Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought said during a recent CNN interview. 'That's what this bill does. No one will lose coverage as a result.' Among many provisions, the House bill would require states to deny Medicaid to people who can't prove they are working, looking for work, in school or volunteering for 80 hours a month. It would prohibit states from using their own money to cover immigrants without legal status and would deny coverage to other lawfully present immigrants who are currently eligible. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the legislation will result in nearly 11 million people losing health insurance coverage over the next decade. The Medicaid provisions alone would result in 7.8 million people losing their insurance. Those coverage losses would equate to hundreds of billions of dollars in savings for the federal government. However, GOP lawmakers and administration officials insist the legislation will protect Medicaid for 'deserving' people such as the elderly and disabled, while forcing others to prove they aren't freeloading. 'It's important for us to provide a nudge to some Americans to remember that they have agency over their future,' Mehmet Oz, the administration's Medicare and Medicaid chief, told reporters on Wednesday, following a closed-door meeting with GOP senators. Later Wednesday in an interview on Fox Business, Oz elaborated. 'Go out there, do entry-level jobs, get into the workforce, prove that you matter. Get agency into your own life,' he said. Republicans are wary about being attacked over health care cuts, and they're eager to reframe the debate and try to go on offense. Voter backlash over the 2017 ObamaCare repeal effort led to widespread GOP losses and cost them control of the House in the 2018 midterms. 'Give me a break, This is just fear-mongering from Democrats,' Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) said in a post on the social platform X. 'No one's losing health care—unless you count the 1.4 million illegal immigrants getting Medicaid on your dime.' Most immigrants without legal status can't qualify for Medicaid at the federal level, but some blue states have extended health care coverage to them. The legislation would penalize those states if they continued to offer coverage by lowering their federal matching rate. In a CNBC interview Thursday, Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) said the people who lose Medicaid coverage will merely transition to employer-sponsored health care. 'It's not kicking people off Medicaid. It's transitioning from Medicaid to employer-provided health care. So yes, we've got 10 million people that are not going to be on Medicaid, but they then are going to be on employer-provided health care,' Lankford said. Yet according to the CBO, 'few of those disenrolled from Medicaid because of the policy would have access to and enroll in employment-based coverage.' A bloc of Republican senators has been raising concerns about some of the Medicaid provisions, and some have said they do not like the idea of anything that could be interpreted as a cut. But by and large, they've signaled the coverage losses aren't what's troubling. '[We need to] protect the program for the people that really deserve and need the help and need the program, you know, and that's children, disabled, seniors, on and on and on,' said Sen. Jim Justice ( 'That's what we got to do. You know, at the end of the day, we shouldn't be protecting the program for people that are abusing or people that shouldn't be eligible, or whatever.' Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) has said he worries about the bill's potential impact on rural hospitals and pledged to withhold support from any bill that cuts Medicaid benefits. But what is a benefit cut? 'If my state tells me that, because of legislative changes in the House bill, the Senate bill, we're going to have to cut benefits. That's a benefit cut,' Hawley told The Hill. Missouri has 1.3 million Medicaid beneficiaries, but Hawley said he thinks there would only be a small number impacted by the work requirements. 'I'm fine with people who are able-bodied and not working … I'm all for that. So you know what, cut benefits from illegal aliens. Yeah, I'm fine with that, but I'm concerned about people who are here legally, residents of my state, citizens of my state, who are working and would lose health care coverage,' he said. Hawley has said that President Trump reiterated his opposition against any Medicaid cuts during recent conversations about the 'big, beautiful bill,' though the president supported the House version. Health experts say the impact of the cuts will go far beyond the small slice of the population Republicans claim. Work requirements will likely add layers of red tape for people to prove they meet the threshold. 'The people losing coverage aren't people who aren't working … but they're actually people who should satisfy the work reporting or should qualify for an exemption, but they can't navigate the complex systems for either reporting one's hours for work or other activities,' said Edwin Park, a research professor at the Georgetown University McCourt School of Public Policy. The legislation includes some exemptions, like for caregiving, but it doesn't specify what would qualify or how beneficiaries would prove they qualify. There's no requirement that states exempt people automatically, Park said, so many people who would be eligible likely wouldn't be enrolled. No matter how Republicans spin it, Park said, 'these are huge Medicaid cuts. They're going to take away coverage from millions of low-income people.' 'And those cuts are going to affect everyone throughout the Medicaid program, not just the expansion group, but also kids, seniors and people with disabilities,' he added. 'And it's going to have big ripple effects throughout the health care system.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Chronic illness exposes health care gaps
RX pharmacy prescription bottle of pills on a pile of $100 dollar bills and a USA outline Living with a chronic illness is not simply physical pain or fatigue; it is a constant negotiation with a health care system that commodifies care. Every doctor's appointment, prescription, and therapy session is a reminder of the overwhelming and taxing obstacles that must be navigated to stay alive. These costs are not merely financial; they also impact time spent with family, peace of mind, and dignity. This battle is not only against illness, but also against a system that fails to recognize people first. We are human beings worthy of compassion and care, not merely a line in a profit ledger. Yet, in today's political climate, legislative proposals threaten access to essential programs for Medicare and Medicaid, posing even greater risk to vulnerable individuals. This is the grim reality for millions of Americans, and it begs an urgent question: When will our health care system start putting humanity over revenue? I am living with Lupus, an autoimmune disease that causes fatigue, joint pain, and organ failure. I have faced unpredictable flare-ups since my diagnosis in 2002. These flare-ups require weekly doctor visits, medications, and sometimes hospitalizations. Even with insurance, out-of-pocket costs can run into the thousands annually, forcing me to make difficult choices: Should I pay for my medications or my mortgage? Should I miss a doctor's appointment to afford groceries? These are not theoretical questions but real decisions that millions of people with chronic illnesses face daily. Medical debt, or personal debt incurred from unpaid medical bills, is a leading cause of bankruptcy in the United States. As many as 40% of U.S. adults, or about 100 million people, are currently in debt because of medical or dental bills. Families with multiple disabilities face compounding expenses in the management of those disabilities, including specialized medical care, therapy, adaptive equipment, and educational support. My family was faced with this challenge as I struggled to manage my and my disabled child's health. This encumbrance is especially heavy for parents relying on Social Security benefits. The emotional toll of balancing these responsibilities often leads to heightened stress and financial insecurity, keeping families trapped in poverty. My geographical location presents an additional barrier to receiving quality, timely, and equitable health care. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that rural residents are often sicker and die younger than individuals in urban communities. This is due to numerous factors, including access. I live in a rural area where health care access is significantly limited. Patients in rural areas often travel long distances to seek specialized care, face poorly resourced local facilities, and experience delayed care. According to the Bowen Center, Indiana has had multiple hospital closures, with 52 rural hospitals remaining as of 2024, and 25% of open hospitals have experienced service reductions. These systemic issues are further compounded by our health care system. Pharmaceutical companies continue to raise the cost of life-saving medications with little to no regulation. Insurance companies often refuse to cover newer, more effective treatments, forcing patients to navigate bureaucratic red tape or accept suboptimal alternatives. CONTACT US Public assistance programs, while helpful, are often insufficient, placing a financial burden on patients. Although Indiana has instituted various measures to solve the overwhelming health care costs, the emotional toll of these financial challenges cannot be overstated. So, what is to be done? First, lawmakers must address the underlying drivers of high health care spending. This involves enacting tougher rules on drug prices, mandating transparency from health providers regarding pricing, and expanding Medicare and Medicaid coverage for people with chronic diseases and disabilities – not creating more barriers. Second, insurers should streamline their procedures so patients have access to necessary treatments without constant denials and delays. Patients and providers will benefit from streamlined processes that remove administrative layers, allowing providers to focus on delivering quality health care. Additionally, rural health care access should be addressed. Removing telehealth restrictions and incentivizing the physician workforce in rural communities would go a long way in addressing the need for health care access in these deserts. Chronic illnesses deeply impact all of our communities. They do not discriminate based on income, and neither should our health care policies. As we move forward, it is crucial that we not only address the physical needs of those living with chronic illnesses, but also alleviate the economic burdens that prevent them from living productive and dignified lives. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
San Francisco Chronicle
2 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Republican senators to watch in the maneuvering over Trump's big bill
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate has set an ambitious timeline for passing President Donald Trump's sweeping legislation to cut taxes and spending. But getting it on the Republican president's desk by July 4 will require some big decisions, and soon. Republican senators are airing concerns about different parts of the legislation, including cuts to Medicaid, changes to food aid and the impact on the deficit. To push the bill to passage, Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota and other negotiators will need to find a compromise that satisfies both ends of their conference — and that can still satisfy the House, which passed the bill last month by only one vote. A look at some of the groups and senators who leaders will have to convince as they work to push Trump's 'big, beautiful' bill toward a Senate vote: Rural state lawmakers Every Republican senator represents a state with a rural constituency — and some of their states are among the most rural in the country. Many in those less-populated areas rely heavily on Medicaid for health care, leading several of them to warn that the changes to the program in the bill could be devastating to communities that are already struggling. Of particular concern is a freeze on a so-called provider tax that some states use to help pay for large portions of their Medicaid programs. The extra tax often leads to higher payments from the federal government, which critics say is a loophole that allows states to inflate their budgets. Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri and several others have argued that freezing that tax revenue would hurt rural hospitals, in particular. 'Hospitals will close,' Hawley said last month. 'It's that simple. And that pattern will replicate in states across the country.' Alabama Sen. Tommy Tuberville said Thursday that provider taxes in his state are 'the money we use for Medicaid.' 'You start cutting that out, we've got big problems,' Tuberville said. Eliminating those taxes 'might lose some folks.' At the same time, Republican senators have little interest in a House-passed provision that spends more money by raising a cap on state and local tax deductions, known as SALT. The higher cap traditionally benefits more urban areas in states with high taxes, such as New York and California. The House included the new cap after New York Republicans threatened to oppose the bill, but Senate Republicans uniformly dislike it. 'I think there's going to have to be some adjustment' on the SALT provision, Thune said Wednesday, noting that 'senators are just in a very different place' from the House. Former (and maybe future) governors The House-passed bill would also shift some Medicaid and food stamp costs to states, a change that has the former governors in the Senate, in particular, worried. West Virginia Sen. Jim Justice, who was governor of his state for eight years before his election to the Senate last year, said he favors many aspects of the bill. He supports the new work requirements for Medicaid and food stamp recipients, the restrictions on benefits for immigrants who are in the country illegally and the efforts to cut down on fraud. 'There's real savings there,' Justice said. 'But then we ought to stop.' 'We're on our way to cannibalizing ourselves,' Justice said. 'We don't want to hurt kids and hurt our families.' The provision stirring the most unease would shift 5% of administrative costs to the state for administering food stamps — known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. States that have high error rates in the program would have to take on an even higher percentage of federal costs. North Dakota Sen. John Hoeven, also a former governor, said senators are working to get feedback from current governors and may propose some 'incentive-oriented ideas' instead of a penalty for the high error rates. 'We don't know if the states have really looked at the impacts of some of this yet,' Hoeven said. Tuberville, who is running for governor of Alabama next year, said the program should be reformed instead of shifting costs. 'I know what our budget is and what we can afford, and we can't start a federal program and then say, 'Oh, let's, let's send it back to the states and let them take a big hunk of it,'' Tuberville said. 'I mean, that's not the way we do it.' The moderates Thune needs to bring Republican moderates on board with the bill, including Maine Sen. Susan Collins and Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski. Both have reservations with the Medicaid cuts, among other things. Collins said she wants to review how the SNAP changes will affect her state. Murkowski has questioned expiring subsidies for the Affordable Care Act and whether they might be needed if people are kicked off Medicaid. Last month, Murkowski said she wants to make sure that people are not negatively impacted by the bill, 'so we're looking at it through that lens for both Medicaid and on energy.' Murkowski and Sens. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, John Curtis of Utah and Jerry Moran of Kansas have also supported energy tax credits that would be phased out quickly under the House bill. The four senators argued that the quick repeal creates uncertainty for businesses and could raise prices for consumers. The right flank Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, Mike Lee of Utah and Rick Scott of Florida have argued the legislation does not save enough money and threatened to vote against it. Paul is considered the least likely to support the measure. He says he won't vote for it if it raises the debt ceiling — a key priority for GOP leaders in both the House and the Senate. The package would raise the nation's debt limit by $4 trillion to allow more borrowing to pay the nation's bills, as the Treasury Department says the limit needs to be raised by the middle of July. Johnson has been railing against the legislation since it was unveiled in the House, arguing that it does little to reduce government spending over time. He took those arguments to Trump last week at a meeting between the president and members of the Senate Finance Committee. After the meeting, Johnson said he would continue to argue that the bill needs to do more to cut costs. But he said he came away with the recognition that he needed to be 'more positive' as Trump exerts political pressure on Republicans to pass it. 'We're a long ways from making the deficit curve bend down, but I recognize that's going to take time,' Johnson said. 'The truth is, there are a lot of good things in this bill that I absolutely support. I want it to succeed.'
