After my formal diagnosis of anorexia nervosa at the start of sophomore year, I quickly realized that my receiving insurance coverage for adequate care was an exception, not the rule. Motivated by personal struggle, my Capstone project became a quest for systemic legislative reform, specifically targeting the loopholes in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that allow insurers to deny life-saving eating disorder treatment.

I began sophomore year researching different aspects of eating disorders. This resulted in a 25-page Google Doc of my findings. I wasn’t exactly sure what to do with all of this information. At one of my doctor's appointments at the Cleveland Clinic with Dr. Ellen Rome, she suggested that I look into the lack of insurance coverage for eating disorder treatment. Once I began, I realized just how large the problem was. This led to my interest in creating a bill that would address holes in the Affordable Care Act that prevent access to essential treatment. While trying to propose my bill, I faced a lack of interest from legislators (who just so happened to be men; 85-95% of anorexia patients are females). Because I could not get a response from local government offices, I decided to create a petition advocating for specification of the wording of the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of the Affordable Care Act to include “eating disorder treatment” under mental health treatment. When this petition received 63 signatures, with my goal being 1,000, I felt discouraged and wasn’t sure how to move forward. 

After a few weeks without progress, I decided that this issue was too important to give up, so I began researching court cases dealing with medical insurance denials and wrote briefs for each of them. This is often a key part of the process before writing a law review, which is what I did next. The culmination of my research is a law review article titled, "Congress’s Commerce Clause Duty to Mandate Insurance Coverage for Inpatient Anorexia Treatment: Economic Impacts of the Lack of Coverage." Drawing from legal precedent, economic theory, and medical statistics, I present a novel argument: the lack of coverage significantly hinders commerce by preventing individuals from recovering and becoming productive members of the workforce. Congress has a constitutional obligation under the Commerce Clause to mandate coverage for this essential care.

This final product is a concrete legal solution to a widespread and life-threatening issue. It positions mental health parity not only as a moral imperative but as a constitutional one rooted in the regulation of commerce. Additionally, the legal writing skills gained throughout this process were recognized when I received first place in the Geauga County Bar Association Law Day Essay Competition, validating the depth of my academic work. I am thankful for this opportunity to translate my personal experience into action and to strive for systemic change in an important yet under-discussed area of law.