In Massachusetts, every health insurer is required to provide an online directory of health care providers in its network, including contact information and whether they are accepting new patients. Under state law, these directories must be accurate and updated. Similar laws exist federally.

But when it comes to behavioral health care, there have long been reports of insurers maintaining “ghost networks,” directories that include a large number of providers who aren’t taking new patients or aren’t in-network. A lawsuit filed May 6 in Suffolk Superior Court, first reported by Axios, accuses Massachusetts insurer Harvard Pilgrim Health Care of continuing to maintain inaccurate provider lists.

Since the pandemic, there has been a growing need for mental health services, and residents have repeatedly reported having trouble finding providers. Laws requiring insurers to publish accurate directories are only as good as their enforcement. The state’s Division of Insurance has authority to enforce the law, through informal resolutions and fines. It should use that authority.

The experiences of the court case’s two plaintiffs, as laid out in their complaint, illustrate why having accurate provider directories is important.

Worcester County resident Jessica Bousquet says she chose a Harvard Pilgrim plan through her employer because it promised a robust provider network. In 2022, Bousquet sought an in-network therapist using Harvard Pilgrim’s directory, looking for someone to provide in-person therapy within 30 minutes of her home who could treat anxiety and post-partum disorders. But the therapists on the insurer’s list either didn’t take her insurance, weren’t accepting new patients, or for other reasons weren’t able to treat her. She relaxed her criteria and spent 10 to 20 hours calling 60 clinicians unsuccessfully. She went 16 months without treatment before finding a therapist, during which time her anxiety affected her physical health, and she had to seek emergency treatment.

Hampden County resident Brian Green switched from Tufts Health Plan to Harvard Pilgrim after those companies merged. In 2023, he started searching for a therapist using the insurer’s directory but couldn’t find someone who was in-network and available. He started randomly calling providers and after a year, found a therapist. In 2024, trying to find a therapist for his minor son, Green ran into the same problem before giving up and enrolling his son with an out-of-network provider who costs more.

Researchers retained by the plaintiffs’ attorneys duplicated their experiences by obtaining Harvard Pilgrim’s provider directory, then calling a random sample of 50 providers that met each plaintiff’s criteria. For the study replicating Bousquet’s experience, 40 of 50 providers were unreachable or couldn’t provide the service. For Green, 28 of 50 providers for adults and 39 of 50 providers for children were unreachable or wouldn’t make an appointment.

As the lawsuit notes, insurance companies have a financial incentive to publish robust network directories that lure people to their plans. But the insurers save money, at least in the short term, if the person forgoes mental health care or gets care out-of-network, where the insurer either pays less or doesn’t cover it at all. That harms patients. “When people in need are unable to find an in-network mental health provider, urgent mental health treatment is often delayed and, at worst, abandoned completely,” the plaintiffs’ attorneys wrote in the lawsuit.

Point32Health, Harvard Pilgrim’s parent organization, said in an emailed statement that the organization doesn’t comment on specific claims in litigation. But the company defended its directory and said it offers a Service Navigation team to help members obtain behavioral health care. “Harvard Pilgrim’s network of behavioral health providers is robust, and we accurately reflect provider’s participation based on information supplied by providers, consistent with regulatory requirements and network adequacy standards,” the statement said. “Additionally, we have a comprehensive process to maintain our provider directory.”

Provider directory inaccuracies were the subject of a US Senate Committee on Finance hearing in 2023. In 2024, a ProPublica investigation found that in multiple states, insurance directories are rife with errors, and state regulators tasked with enforcing accuracy rarely fine insurers.

In Massachusetts, when Governor Maura Healey was attorney general in 2020, her office reached agreements with five health insurers, including Harvard Pilgrim and two companies that manage behavioral health coverage for insurers, which required the insurers to maintain accurate provider directories.

The Massachusetts Division of Insurance did not respond by deadline to questions regarding whether and how it has enforced the provider directory law.

The current lawsuit is seeking certification as a class action. Similar suits are pending in California, New York, and Connecticut. But getting to a judicial ruling or settlement will take time.

A more effective and efficient way to ensure patients can find providers when they need them is for the state Division of Insurance to enforce the law by fining insurers for substantially inaccurate directories, giving insurers a financial incentive to keep their directories up to date.

Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us @GlobeOpinion.