Skip navigation View an alternate layout of this website with limited styles and no horizontal scrolling
Menu

Medicaid, Assistive Technology, and the Courts

By AT Advocate, Vol. XI, No. 1, pp. 370-380
Publication Date: Winter 2006-2007

Article summarizing most of the important assistive-technology (AT) related court decisions regarding Medicaid cases since the establishment in the mid-1990s of the Protection and Advocacy for Assistive Technology (PAAT) programs. Illustrative court cases are summarized in the following categories: (1) Exclusive List Cases, which challenged Medicaid policies of non-approval of whole classes of durable medical equipment (DME) such as powered wheelchairs, Jacuzzis, and insulin pumps; (2) Denial of Funding on the Basis of Age, where courts have held that state Medicaid agencies cannot treat children more favorably than adults in their request for an AT; (3) EPSDT and Children Under Age 21, which discusses cases relevant to Medicaid’s Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnosis and Treatment (EPSDT) program requiring states to cover all medically necessary services for Medicaid-eligible children under the age of 21; and (4) Specific Categories of AT or DME, covering favorable court decisions regarding devices such as AAC (augmentative and alternative communication) devices, standing frames, stairway chairlifts, wheelchair specialty features such as a built-in tilt-in-space, CCTVs (closed-circuit televisions), a swimming-pool lift, and binaural hearing aids. A resource list of websites supporting Medicaid advocacy is appended.
Published by: Neighborhood Legal Services, Inc.   (Website:http://www.nls.org)

Link to text: http://www.nls.org/av/winter06-07.htm

AbleData, 8630 Fenton Street, Suite 930, Silver Spring, MD 20910. 1-800-227-0216.
Maintained for the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research of the U.S. Dept. of Education
by ICF Macro under Contract No. ED-04-CO-0018/0007.

The records in AbleData are provided for information purposes only. Neither the U.S. Department of Education nor ICF Macro has examined, reviewed, or tested any product, device, or information contained in AbleData. The Department and ICF Macro make no endorsement, representation, or warranty express or implied as to any product, device, or information set forth in AbleData. The views expressed on this site do not necessarily represent the opinions of the Department of Education, the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, or ICF Macro.