The author reviews the evidence for the probable acceleration of insurance coverage for mental illness treatment and points out the flaws in some of the arguments advanced by insurers against the feasibility of increased coverage. He suggests some areas in which the profession should focus efforts toward attaining more comprehensive benefits, including the coverage of all accepted types of treatment and of newly emerging consultative services, as well as the pooling of family benefits. The need for peer review as a control measure is also stressed.Abstract Teaser