
Mental health insurance problems continue: 5 things to check before buying a cover
mental health insurance
searches in 2025,' says Siddharth Singhal, Head of Health Insurance, Policybazaar.
The surge is corroborated by Bhaskar Nerurkar, Head, Health Administration Team, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance: 'We've seen a steady increase in
mental health
related claims, with a CAGR of about 33% from 2021-22 to 2024-25. In the last year alone, there was a 23% rise in such claims over the previous year.'
These figures seem reassuring in the face of grim societal stigma and the fact that 10.6% of adults in India suffer from mental disorders and the lifetime prevalence of mental disorders is 13.7%, as per the National Mental Health Survey 2015-16 by NIMHANS.
However, Anuradha Sriram, Chief Actuarial Officer, Aditya Birla Health Insurance, strikes a discordant note. 'While awareness and conversation around mental health have increased in recent years, we have not observed a significant rise in mental health related hospitalisation claims,' she says. This is because most treatments for mental health continue to be outpatient-based, which are generally not captured in the scope of hospitalisation plans, she explains.
The in-patient focus of most plans is only one of the several problems faced by people seeking mental health covers despite the
insurance
regulator's proactive approach in widening the scope of coverage.
Live Events
Irdai guidelines
Though the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, was enforced in May 2018, Irdai was forced to issue circulars in August 2018 and then again in October 2022, requesting compliance by insurers and removal of mental illnesses from their list of exclusions. The guidelines stated that mental illnesses had to be treated at par with physical illnesses when it came to providing coverage.
While insurers eventually started offering mental health coverage in their plans by the end of 2022, in February 2023, Irdai was again forced to issue a circular to 'mandatorily launch and immediately offer' an 'appropriate product' and a 'specific cover' for persons with mental illnesses, disabilities and HIV/AIDS, which translated to a standardised, standalone cover.
A crucial inclusion was the need to put in place a 'Board-approved underwriting policy that ensures no proposal is denied'. This meant the insurers could not refuse a cover to a person with pre-existing mental disorders.
Problems in getting coverage
Today, all general and standalone health insurers do abide by the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, and include mental illnesses in their health plans. 'We offer mental health coverage as part of our
health insurance
plans in alignment with Irdai guidelines. The plans typically cover hospitalisation expenses arising from mental illnesses, including depression, anxiety, bipolar disorder and schizophrenia,' says Priya Deshmukh, Head, Health Product, Operations & Services, ICICI Lombard. Other insurers too cover mental illnesses under their comprehensive plans.
In-patient, not OPD plans: The problem with most such covers is that these are indemnity plans that only cover hospitalisation or in-patient expenses, whereas most mental disorders require periodic doctor consultations, therapies, counselling, medication and psychiatric evaluations, which are out-patient features. Policybazaar data shows that conditions like anxiety (30-35%) and depression (25-30%) are the top reasons for claims, which are usually managed through out-patient care rather than inpatient admission.
5 questions to ask before buying a mental health plan
Without these features and benefits, the insurance policy may not be of much use to you.
1. Does it have a pre-existing disease waiting period?
If the applicant already suffers from a mental illness, buying a plan may be a challenge, depending on the severity of the disorder. In all probability, he will have to clear the waiting period for pre-existing diseases, which is 2-3 years for most insurers, before he can be covered for the disorder.
2. Does it offer OPD benefit?
Doctor consultations and medication are an integral part of mental health treatments, which can only be covered by a plan with an OPD feature. So, if OPD benefit is missing, either as a part of the base cover or as an optional feature, the plan won't be of much use to you.
3. Does it cover therapy & counselling?
Even if the OPD benefit is included in the plan, not all insurers offer all the features that are crucial for mental health treatments, such as therapy, counselling and psychiatric evaluations, which can be very expensive. Make sure these are a part of the cover.
4. Is your therapist or health care centre in the network?
Most insurers require the treatment to be conducted by a qualified practitioner in a recognised institute, hospital or clinic that falls in its network. If these don't fulfill the insurer requirements, you will not be able to make a claim.
5. Is your illness covered?
You will need to ensure that your particular mental illness is included in the plan. The disorders usually covered by insurers include anxiety, depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, PTSD and dementia. If the illness is not covered, there's no point buying the cover.
Agrees Sriram: 'Our flagship products are hospitalisation-focused indemnity plans, covering in-patient treatment for mental health conditions. However, many mental health treatments, like therapy or consultations, are outpatient in nature and are not covered under the base plan.'
'OPD coverage is crucial even as an addon because a plan that only covers hospitalisation may not suffice for real-world needs,' says Singhal. So, either the policy buyer needs to find a plan that has an in-built OPD feature, or buy an OPD rider along with the base cover, both of which require additional expense due to higher premiums that these entail.
Underwriting hurdles:
For people with existing mental conditions, especially with a high degree of severity, it can be difficult to buy a plan despite Irdai specifying that insurers cannot refuse it.
'While Irdai has mandated insurers to cover mental health conditions, underwriting still applies. This means that individuals with a known history of mental illness may face medical assessments, loading on premiums, or specific exclusions,' says Deshmukh. This could mean either expensive plans, limits on coverage, or long waiting periods, usually between two and three years, and sometimes even rejection for severe disorders.
Network practitioners:
Since the treatment for many mental illnesses requires therapy and counselling, many people pick private therapists or clinics, which may not be in the insurer networks or empanelled. Besides, correct diagnosis and effective therapy can often mean sifting through various doctors and counsellors before finding the right one that suits the patient, and not every such practitioner may be a part of the insurer network.
Standardised plans:
Many general and standalone health insurance companies offer a standardised plan that provides a cover of `4-5 lakh and includes mental illnesses among other disabilities and disorders. This standardised plan is an affordable base plan with similar offerings across insurers, but is available under different names and varying premiums, which is typically low. However, since it is not a comprehensive plan and offers low coverage, it means the policyholders would need to pad it up, besides buying another cover for other illnesses as well.
What to look for in a plan
'Consumers should look for comprehensive plans that include mental health as part of their base coverage and evaluate whether the insurer offers any additional riders/add-ons that support out-patient care or wellness programs,' says Sriram.
Agrees Nerurkar. 'It's advisable to consider whether the policy offers OPD benefits for consultations, therapy sessions, and medication. Some plans also provide wellness programs or teleconsultation services, which can be highly valuable for ongoing support. Transparency regarding waiting periods, exclusions (like illnesses related to substance abuse), and pre-existing condition disclosures is critical to ensuring seamless claims later,' he says.
One should also check whether the insurer has a strong hospital network with the required facilities. 'Ensure that the insurer's network hospitals include facilities offering psychiatric services and that these are accessible in your area,' says Deshmukh.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Mint
2 hours ago
- Mint
It's time to fix health insurance for India's ‘missing middle'. Here's how to do it.
India has made commendable progress in expanding healthcare access, especially for economically weaker, sections through initiatives such as Ayushman Bharat. However, a large segment remains inadequately protected—the uninsured and underinsured middle class. Roughly 8 to 10 crore Indian households fall into this 'missing middle". They are too affluent for subsidised schemes but unable to afford adequate private insurance. As healthcare costs rise steadily, this group is increasingly vulnerable to financial distress during medical emergencies. The current retail health insurance model is structurally flawed. The typical ₹5-10 lakh cover that most families buy appears sufficient but loses value over time as healthcare inflation averages 10-12% annually. In a decade, the real value of this cover falls drastically. Premiums also rise sharply with age. For those above 55 or 60, premiums can exceed 20% of the sum insured—an unsustainable cost when health risks are highest. Health insurance, ironically, becomes least viable when it is needed most. Pre-existing conditions such as diabetes and hypertension—common among Indians over 45—further raise the barrier to new coverage. High distribution costs inflate premiums without adding value. Insurers also lack leverage with hospitals, leading to inflated treatment costs, higher claims, and rising premiums. How to fix this Yet, India has the building blocks to create a better model. The government has already laid the foundation for a voluntary, contributory, government-facilitated insurance scheme for middle India. First, Ayushman Bharat has negotiated cost-effective treatment rates with a wide hospital network. Second, India has developed robust health data infrastructure to detect fraud, monitor overcharging, and guide investment into under-served regions. Third, the evolving health exchange platform, which integrates insurers, providers, and the government, can serve as the backbone for such a scheme. The proposed scheme would be designed by the government but run by licensed private insurers regulated by IRDAI. It would be voluntary and offered via a government-managed digital platform for enrolment, premium payment, claims processing, renewals, and servicing. Coverage options could range from ₹5 lakh to ₹1 crore. Crucially, the sum insured would increase every three years by 15-25% to counter inflation. All pre-existing conditions would be covered from day one. To avoid adverse selection—where mainly sick individuals enrol—a 25% co-payment would apply in the first year for non-accident claims. This co-pay would reduce by 6.25% each claim-free year, disappearing after four years. Those with frequent claims would still share some costs, ensuring fairness and sustainability. Premiums would be based only on age, gender, or family size—not health status. While insurers could limit sum insured for high-risk individuals or apply premium loadings, uniform rating by health condition would not be allowed. Hospital costs would be benchmarked to Ayushman Bharat rates, with a transparent mark-up for higher coverage, inflation, and reasonable hospital margins. Rates would be reviewed biennially. The government's digital platform would act as a single window for comparing plans, initiating claims, enabling cashless care, and renewing policies. A nominal platform fee of 3-5% would cover its operations and provide analytics to help insurers improve pricing, detect fraud, and reduce misuse. The scheme could serve as a standalone policy or a top-up to employer-provided health cover, allowing flexibility. To encourage insurer participation, early losses could be carried forward for 10-12 years. Additionally, the solvency margin requirement could be reduced from 150% to 100% for the first five years to support portfolio development. Comprehensive coverage at a lower cost This model offers several advantages. It provides comprehensive, inflation-adjusted coverage with no exclusions. Treatment costs would be lower due to pre-agreed hospital rates and minimal distribution costs. Consequently, premiums would be far more affordable than current retail products. The design rewards those who don't claim, while still covering those who do—striking a fair balance. Critically, the model does not require recurring government spending. A one-time partial premium contribution could be considered initially to accelerate enrolment. Regulatory oversight would remain with IRDAI—no new regulator is needed. Existing solvency and governance frameworks would apply. This proposal is not a replacement for existing schemes. Rather, it fills a critical gap in the healthcare financing ecosystem—protecting India's middle class from mounting health risks and costs. The government of India has an opportunity to catalyse this initiative. It builds on existing infrastructure, aligns with market principles, requires minimal fiscal support, and responds to a real need for millions of families. India can lead the world in creating a voluntary, digital-first, inflation-protected health insurance model for the middle class. The time to act is now. Kamesh Goyal is chairman of the Go Digit group of companies. Views expressed are his own.


Hans India
4 hours ago
- Hans India
Ethiopia reports over 520,000 malaria cases in May: WHO
The World Health Organization (WHO) has said malaria coordination and surveillance efforts are underway in Ethiopia, as the country reported more than 520,000 malaria cases in a single month. The WHO, in an Ethiopia Health Cluster Bulletin report released, said the East African country reported a total of 520,782 malaria cases in May. Meanwhile, the WHO said Ethiopia is currently responding to multiple disease outbreaks, including cholera, measles, malaria and mpox. Noting that ongoing conflict situations in parts of the country continue to affect public health, it said conflicts have "left people in urgent need of assistance, many of whom are trapped in hard-to-reach areas with severely restricted humanitarian access." Malaria is endemic in Ethiopia, with higher prevalence in areas below the 2,000-metre altitude, covering three-quarters of the East African country's land mass. Around 69 per cent of the country's population residing in these areas face the risk of infection. Typically, malaria peaks between September and December following the primary rainy season in the country, and from April to May after the secondary rainy season, Xinhua news agency reported. According to the WHO, Ethiopia reported more than 8.4 million malaria cases in 2024, which was said to be the highest-ever number of cases reported in the country within a year. The health organisation also mentioned that Malaria is a life-threatening disease spread to humans by some types of mosquitoes. It is mostly found in tropical countries. It is preventable and curable. The infection is caused by a parasite and does not spread from person to person. Symptoms can be mild or life-threatening. Mild symptoms are fever, chills and headache. Severe symptoms include fatigue, confusion, seizures, and difficulty breathing. Infants, children under 5 years, pregnant women and girls, travellers and people with HIV or AIDS are at higher risk of severe infection. Malaria can be prevented by avoiding mosquito bites and with medicines. Treatments can stop mild cases from getting worse.


Time of India
7 hours ago
- Time of India
Lancet study projects US foreign aid cuts could result in over 1.4 crore preventable deaths globally
Steep funding cuts to the United States Agency for International Development ( USAID ) could result in over 1.4 crore preventable deaths by 2030, a third of which could be among children aged under five, according to a study published in The Lancet journal. The study said the fund cuts could reverse decades of progress and that for many low and middle-income countries, the resulting shock would be comparable in scale to a "global pandemic" or a "major armed conflict". In March, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said President Donald Trump's administration has cancelled 83 per cent of all programmes at USAID, the world's largest funding agency for humanitarian and development aid. The cuts "risk abruptly halting -- and even reversing -- two decades of progress in health among vulnerable populations," study coordinator Davide Rasella, research professor at the Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal) in Spain, said. "For many low- and middle-income countries, the resulting shock would be comparable in scale to a global pandemic or a major armed conflict," Rasella said. The researchers also estimated that between 2001 and 2021, more than nine crore deaths in low and middle-income countries were prevented because of USAID-supported programmes. About a third of these were among children. "Our analysis shows that USAID funding has been an essential force in saving lives and improving health outcomes in some of the world's most vulnerable regions over the past two decades," first author Daniella Cavalcanti, a postdoctoral researcher at the Federal University of Bahia, Brazil, said. For the analysis, the researchers used models to forecast impacts due to two scenarios -- continuing funding at the 2023-level, or implementing the sharp reduction of 83 per cent announced in March 2025. "Current steep funding cuts could result in more than 1,40,51,750 additional all-age deaths, including 45,37,157 in children younger than age five years, by 2030," the authors wrote. The study also found that USAID-supported programmes were associated with a 15 per cent reduced all-cause mortality and a 32 per cent reduced death rates among children under five. Further, in countries receiving high levels of USAID support, the strongest impact was found in priority disease areas -- deaths from HIV/AIDS fell by 74 per cent, malaria by 53 per cent, and neglected tropical diseases by 51 per cent, compared to countries receiving low or no support. The research is the first comprehensive analysis to assess the impact of total USAID funding, including support for health care, nutrition, humanitarian aid, development, education, and related sectors, on mortality rates in low and middle-income countries over the past two decades, the study said.