January 30, 2010 9:11 AM, The quality of posts on this blog is extraordinary, a tribute, without question, to the blogger-in-chief herself. That being said, I think that each and every one of you temperate, informed and insightful commenters has missed Megan’s deeper point.
Specifically, whether or not the mental health mandate is unassailably appropriate, it suffers from having been arrived at by a process consisting of some mix of the Potter Stewart test (“I’ll know it when I see it”) and rent seeking-special pleading.
While we can never avoid some measure of both, the process utterly lacks a framework for evaluation, or even the pretense of one. If I can presume to distill what I understand Megan’s deeper point to be, we need to move from the healthcare policy equivalent of diagnosing based on pre-Coperincan body humours to an approach that steers discussion and debate in the direction of data and explicit assumptions