I recently became aware that Group Health Cooperative of South Central Wisconsin, one of the biggest insurance companies in and around Dane County, Wisconsin has decided to enact a “provisional policy” which states essentially that no employee (doctor, therapist, nurse, etc.) of GHC is able to write a letter for their patients supporting emotional support animals in regards to their housing.  Members were not told about this until they needed the service and it was denied to them.  As the law on emotional support animals is written, documentation from "a physician, psychologist, social worker, or other health professional, licensed in Wisconsin and acting within the scope of their certification, showing they have a disability and their animal is needed as an accommodation".  Wisconsin state law defines an emotional support animal as one who gives "emotional support, well-being, or companionship" to a person with a disability.  Federal Fair Housing (in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act) section 504 says that emotional support animals are considered a legitimate coping method for physical and mental health issues, including anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress.  The Fair Housing Act requires housing providers to allow for reasonable accommodations involving an assistance animal in situations that meet the person having a disability supported by documentation.  With rent increases, insurance premiums, and other costs not keeping up with wages, GHC’s “provisional policy” appears to go against Fair Housing and the ADA and directly and negatively impacts the most vulnerable folx in our community such as vets, survivors of domestic violence, and others coping with mental wellness challenges.  What happens when insurance companies are telling providers to make their patients choose between their emotional support animal or housing?  This is an emotional, financial, and mental undue burden, causing further trauma.  I have learned that this “provisional policy” stemmed from behavioral health manager James Van Den Brandt who admitted that there wasn’t an actual policy but his advisement had been directed to all GHC employees.  Demand GHC be accountable to help their patients and not hurt those already struggling in our community by reversing this decision.