Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Mental Health Parity Act Mandates NDT Under Individual Plans

By Rita Latsinova on October 14, 2014
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

In O.S.T. v. Regence BlueShield, the Washington Supreme Court held that Regence’s exclusion of neurodevelopmental therapies (NDT) in individual policies violated the mental health parity act, RCW 48.44.341.  The Court rejected Regence’s reliance on an earlier statute,  RCW 48.44.450, which mandates NDT to children under seven in group plans only.  The named plaintiffs were autistic children, aged six, who were denied coverage for NDT under their individual plans.  Regence argued that the denial was authorized by RCW 48.44.450, which is more specific than RCW 48.44.341.  The Court concluded that the two statutes do not conflict.  The former sets the floor on required coverage in group plans for children under seven.  The latter sets a higher floor by requiring parity for mental health services in all plans.

Photo of Rita Latsinova Rita Latsinova

Rita Latsinova is a partner practicing in Stoel Rives’ Litigation group. Her experience includes complex commercial litigation, constitutional law, class actions, international arbitration and general appellate practice in state and federal courts.

Read more about Rita LatsinovaEmail
  • Posted in:
    Health Care and Life Sciences
  • Blog:
    Notice of Appeal
  • Organization:
    Stoel Rives LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo