Patients Struggle to Access Mental Health Care Due to 'Ghost Networks'

Insurance companies accused of misleading patients with inaccurate provider directories

Apr. 10, 2026 at 2:57am

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A minimalist design in the style of Keith Haring, featuring glowing neon lines outlining the shape of a therapist's couch against a dark background, conceptually representing the challenges patients face in accessing mental health services.Neon outlines of mental health symbols shine a light on the 'ghost network' problem, where insurance directories mislead patients seeking critical care.NYC Today

A growing number of lawsuits are challenging insurance companies over the issue of 'ghost networks' - inaccurate provider directories that give the illusion of choice while many listed professionals are unavailable or out of network. This problem has severe consequences, especially for those seeking mental health support, as patients end up paying large sums out of pocket or delaying care altogether. A recent class action lawsuit by New York state government employees alleges that EmblemHealth's directory misrepresents the number of in-network providers, hindering access to critical mental health services.

Why it matters

Access to mental health care is a critical issue, and the 'ghost network' problem is a significant barrier preventing many patients from getting the support they need. This highlights broader challenges in the healthcare system, where insurance companies may prioritize profits over patient wellbeing. Addressing this problem could improve mental health outcomes and hold insurers accountable for providing accurate information.

The details

The 'ghost network' phenomenon refers to insurance company directories that list mental health providers who are either unavailable or out of network, giving patients the false impression of choice. This issue is so widespread that it has a specific name, and attempts to hold insurers accountable have largely failed due to laws that prevent patients from suing. However, a recent class action lawsuit by New York state government employees is challenging the status quo, alleging that EmblemHealth's directory misrepresents the number of in-network providers.

  • In the last two years, at least seven similar lawsuits have been filed against insurance companies over 'ghost networks'.
  • The New York attorney general's office secured a $2.5 million settlement from EmblemHealth, which has agreed to improve its provider listings and compensate members who paid out of pocket.

The players

EmblemHealth

A health insurance company that is the subject of a class action lawsuit alleging its provider directory misrepresents the availability of in-network mental health professionals.

Val Calderon

A special education teacher and plaintiff in the class action lawsuit against EmblemHealth, who shared her experience of desperately seeking mental health support through the company's network only to find most providers were out of network or not accepting new patients.

Steve Cohen

A lawyer leading the charge in filing similar lawsuits against insurance companies over the 'ghost network' issue, believing litigation is the only way to bring about real change.

Dr. Marketa Wills

The CEO of the American Psychiatric Association, which is part of the class action lawsuit against EmblemHealth, stating that the accuracy of provider networks is a widespread issue leaving patients 'desperate for help' but unable to access care.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“I felt enraged. This coverage is supposed to provide me with support, but there's none. That's how I look at it.”

— Val Calderon, Special education teacher and plaintiff

“The accuracy of provider networks varies, but it's a widespread issue. Patients reach out, desperate for help, only to realize the network is a ghost. It's a very difficult situation.”

— Dr. Marketa Wills, CEO, American Psychiatric Association

What’s next

The class action lawsuit against EmblemHealth is ongoing, and the outcome could set a precedent for similar cases challenging insurance companies' practices around provider directories. Regulators and lawmakers may also take further action to address the 'ghost network' issue and improve access to mental health care.

The takeaway

This case highlights the significant barriers patients face in accessing mental health services, even when they have insurance coverage. It underscores the need for greater transparency and accountability from insurance companies, as well as stronger protections for patients seeking critical care. Addressing the 'ghost network' problem could improve mental health outcomes and ensure the healthcare system truly serves the needs of those it is designed to support.