Review other posts submitted by your classmates. Respond to at least two other posts. In your responses, explain whether you agree or disagree with the original poster's position and why. Offer suggestions and perspectives that the original poster may not have considered or weighed differently than you. Post # 1 Rachel Watson  Hello class, my name is Rachel and I am nearing (finally) the end of my MHA degree. I have been a nurse for over 15 years and decided to transition from clinical healthcare to administrative because I have worked in many organizations where administrative leaders have little to know clinical knowledge, yet make substantial decisions impacting clinical workflow and patient care. That being said, I have worked over 10 years in the federal healthcare system as a military spouse and recently relocated to Japan after living in Germany for 6.5 years. I actually am writing this in quarantine (thanks Covid-19) as military regulations require us to quarantine for 14 days after arriving in the country. My career goals have been modified quite a bit in the last year, as I was gearing up to move back to the US and have a lot more employment opportunities, but like always, the military had different plans for us. My employment options are very limited here in Japan but I hope to make the best out of the situation and hopefully can find some employment opportunities to enhance my professional development.   As I mentioned, one of the main reasons I switched from clinical to administrative roles is because I felt decision makers needed clinical guidance and knowledge. When thinking about the role of interest groups in policy-making, I think it’s fair to say a wide variety of stakeholders need to be actively engaged in the policy process to best suit all stakeholders. I say this because a policy can improve things for one group of stakeholders while providing negative effects for another group. For example, access to care has been at the forefront of many healthcare issues; however, shortening appointment times to allow for more appointment slots will improve access to care for patients but could decrease the quality of care provided from providers and increase the workload of those clinicians. I can speak from experience that this change, while intended to have positive impacts on patient care actually leads to increased frustration from both providers and patients because patients are rushed out of their appointments feeling like the provider isn’t listening. That being said, focus groups for policy making should include a variety of stakeholders such as providers, patients, public figures, insurance agents and government officials if available to create an environment to discuss policies that will affect positives and negatives for each stakeholder group to best approach local and national levels. Furthermore, it is important to remember that many healthcare policies and decisions are made at the state level and don’t require fe.

1. Review other posts submitted by your classmates. Respond to at
least two other posts. In your responses, explain whether you
agree or disagree with the original poster's position and why.
Offer suggestions and perspectives that the original poster may
not have considered or weighed differently than you.
Post # 1
Rachel Watson
Hello class, my name is Rachel and I am nearing (finally) the
end of my MHA degree. I have been a nurse for over 15 years
and decided to transition from clinical healthcare to
administrative because I have worked in many organizations
where administrative leaders have little to know clinical
knowledge, yet make substantial decisions impacting clinical
workflow and patient care. That being said, I have worked over
10 years in the federal healthcare system as a military spouse
and recently relocated to Japan after living in Germany for 6.5
years. I actually am writing this in quarantine (thanks Covid-19)
as military regulations require us to quarantine for 14 days after
arriving in the country. My career goals have been modified
quite a bit in the last year, as I was gearing up to move back to
the US and have a lot more employment opportunities, but like
always, the military had different plans for us. My employment
options are very limited here in Japan but I hope to make the
best out of the situation and hopefully can find some
employment opportunities to enhance my professional
development.
As I mentioned, one of the main reasons I switched from
clinical to administrative roles is because I felt decision makers
needed clinical guidance and knowledge. When thinking about
the role of interest groups in policy-making, I think it’s fair to
say a wide variety of stakeholders need to be actively engaged

2. in the policy process to best suit all stakeholders. I say this
because a policy can improve things for one group of
stakeholders while providing negative effects for another group.
For example, access to care has been at the forefront of many
healthcare issues; however, shortening appointment times to
allow for more appointment slots will improve access to care
for patients but could decrease the quality of care provided from
providers and increase the workload of those clinicians. I can
speak from experience that this change, while intended to have
positive impacts on patient care actually leads to increased
frustration from both providers and patients because patients are
rushed out of their appointments feeling like the provider isn’t
listening. That being said, focus groups for policy making
should include a variety of stakeholders such as providers,
patients, public figures, insurance agents and government
officials if available to create an environment to discuss
policies that will affect positives and negatives for each
stakeholder group to best approach local and national levels.
Furthermore, it is important to remember that many healthcare
policies and decisions are made at the state level and don’t
require federal government interventions (Teitelbaum &
Wilensky, 2020).
As far as financing is concerned for interest groups, I don’t
know if there will ever be enough funding to support impacts on
healthcare policy makers. The problem is, the influence on
lobbyists directly correlates with achieving specific goals of
interest groups; however, the effects can be neglected due to
opposing funding points (Fincham, 2010). To me, that speaks to
the fact that money talks and unless you can buy your way into
someones ear, interest groups will never have enough traction to
truly make decent headway in policy making processes. That
being said, I feel that interest groups at this time do not have
enough influence on healthcare policy making and the process
should be revisited for interest groups to rally, secure strong
elbows and force their way into being heard and make a

3. difference.
Rachel
References
Fincham, J. (2010, February 10).
Financial realities affect political support for health care reform
. PubMed Central.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2829137/
Teitelbaum, J. B., & Wilensky, S. E. (2020). Essentials of
health policy and law 4th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones &
Bartlett Learning. ISBN: 978-1-284-15161-9
Post # 2
Christen Karch
Hello Class!
Healthcare policies often come to fruition as a response
to an event, need, or concern within the community that are
highlighted by specific interest groups. Interest groups will
work with various stakeholders of healthcare facilities to
confirm the need for the policy and, ultimately, work to lobby
for the policy through federal/state legislation. As a result,
stakeholders have great influence on the development of a
policy/procedure within healthcare, as stakeholders are active
participants in the services offered by the healthcare facility.
A stakeholder is generally defined as being those entities that
are integrally involved in the healthcare system and would be
substantially affected by reforms to the system (“Health Care
Reform,” 2011). There are both internal and external
stakeholders. Internal stakeholders include the board of

4. directors, facility leadership, and staff. External stakeholders
include patients, families, community members, and advocacy
groups. Balancing the needs of internal/external stakeholders is
critical when looking at market-driven strategic planning and
policy development. This balance includes looking at how areas
such as regulatory factors, social forces, technological factors,
economic factors, competitive factors, and society impact the
stakeholder (Berkowitz, 2017, p. 23). Interest groups are
aware of these factors which can be the basis of and greatly
influence further policy development.
Within the field of mental health, Mental Health America
(MHA) is the nation’s leading community-based nonprofit
dedicated to addressing the needs of those living with mental
illness and to promoting the overall mental health of Americans
though the recommendation of changes in policy by focusing on
prevention, early identification, integrated care/treatment, and
recovery (“Legislative Priorities,” 2020). MHA works with
communities in order to identify issues/barriers related to
mental health treatment. These issues/barriers are worked into
position statements that are lobbied to become lawful
policies/legislation. The development of position statements
requires an understanding of the role of both federal/state
governments within healthcare. The federal role regarding
mental health includes regulating systems/providers, protecting
the rights of consumers, providing funding for services, and
supporting research/innovation whereas the state role requires
state mental health systems meet certain standards set by the
federal government with allotment to expand on what exists at
the federal level to improve services, access, and protections for
consumers (“The Federal,” 2020). Taking these items into
consideration, current legislation supported by MHA includes
the Lower Health Care Costs Act, the Mental Health Services
for Students Act, the Mental Health Parity Compliance Act of
20419, and the Medicaid Reentry Act (“Current Mental Health,”
2020).

5. The primary funding for interest groups is through donation.
Well-funded interest groups can have a larger influence/impact
on policy development. As interest groups receive donations,
they can fund the policy development. Within 2020, MHA
reported only 3 lobbyists with total lobbying expenditures of
$20,000 (“Client Profile,” 2020). Once the policy is written
into law or utilized on a state/federal level, it is not uncommon
for the interest/lobbying group to receive monetary/financial
benefits from the policy.
In my opinion, the role of interest groups should mirror the
needs of the stakeholders within the healthcare facilities.
Interest groups need to be rooted in advocacy and work with
stakeholders to identify needs within healthcare communities,
whether this be at a state or national level. When a need is
identified, policies can be created to meet the need. MHA is an
example of the positive effect an interest group can have in
healthcare. They have established a role in setting healthcare
policy at larger levels, thus meeting the needs of the mental
health community. Working within the field of mental health
for over fifteen years, I have seen the impact of interest group
involvement. The stigma surrounding mental health requires
strong advocacy and a loud voice in order to ensure appropriate
policies are enacted to care for the mental health population.
The voice held by interest groups should make others aware of
changes that need to take place. The need for change should be
supported by data. This data can be provided by interest
groups. Interest groups collect and gather the information that
policy/lawmakers need to make educated and informed
decisions. Interest groups have the ability to provide
lawmakers with personal insight into a relevant issue, ultimately
fostering greater civic engagement by removing the perception
of obstacles between lawmakers and ordinary citizens (“How Do
Interest,” 2020).

6. References
Berkowitz, E. (2017).
Essentials of health care marketing
. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett
Client Profile: Mental Health America. (2020). Retrieved from
https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-
lobbying/clients/lobbhttps://www.mhanational.org/issues/federa
l-and-state-role-mental-
healthyists?cycle=2020&id=D000054293
Current Mental Health Legislation. (2020). Retrieved from
https://www.mhanational.org/issues/current-mental-health-
legislation
Health Care Reform: Duties and Responsibilities of the
Stakeholder. 2011. Retrieved
from
https://sites.sju.edu/icb/health-care-reform-duties-and-
responsibilities-of-the-stakeholders/
How Do Interest Groups Influence Health Policy? (2020).
Retrieved from
https://onlineprograms.smumn.edu/mahhsa/masters-in-health-
and-human-services/resources/how-interest-groups-influence-
health-policy
Legislative Priorities. (2020). Retrieved from
https://www.mhanational.org/legislative-priorities
The Federal and State Role in Mental Health. (2020). Retrieved
from
https://www.mhanational.org/issues/federal-and-state-role-
mental-health