Fw: [SacAutism] Class action against Kaiser certified-treatment of autism

[Guest guest]

For your information and action perhaps.

Subject: [sacAutism] Class action against Kaiser certified-treatment of autism

To: Sacautism

Date: Thursday, January 28, 2010, 4:51 PM

Glovsky (the attorney who is working the Arce vs Kaiser class action

lawsuit) is looking for parents with denial letters from Kaiser for treating

their children's autism.  The more denial letters has, the more he can

show that Kaiser is refusing to provide necessary services to a class of people

(with autism).  If you know of parents with denial letters who would feel

comfortable sharing them with 's office, here is the contact info.  The

letters can be scanned and emailed, faxed or mailed.

Law Offices of C. Glovsky

225 S. Lake Avenue, Suite 1000

Pasadena, CA  91101

Phone:

Fax:

Email:

sglovsky@...

 

--------------------------------------------------------

-Healthcare Law-

Allegation that health plan systematically breached its health plan

contract by categorically denying coverage for behavioral therapy and

speech therapy to plan members with autism spectrum disorders, even

though those services were contractually covered, was sufficient to

state a class action claim under the Unfair Competition Law. Allegation

that health plan engaged in unlawful conduct under the UCL by denying

coverage for diagnosis and treatment of autism spectrum disorders under

the same terms and conditions applied to other medical conditions, in

violation of the Mental Health Parity Act, stated class action claim.

Such services are health care services within the meaning of the act,

and defendant's contention that such services may be provided by

unlicensed persons and are thus exempt from the act as custodial care

was appropriate for resolution in class action. Trial court abused its

discretion in applying the doctrine of judicial abstention to UCL claim

for violation of health plan contract and Mental Health Parity Act.

Resolution of such a claim would not call upon the court to engage in

individualized determinations of medical necessity for each putative

class member but rather to perform the basic judicial functions of

contractual and statutory interpretation.

     Arce v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. - filed January 27,

2010, Second District, Div. Seven

     Cite as 2010 SOS 411

     Full text http://www.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0110%2FB215861