The importance of travel insurance

[FIRELT5]

http://www.northjersey.com/news/033112_BAHAMASCRASH.html?c=y&page=1&scpromo=1

[TEXASMUNK]

Why haven't the Bahamas passed Obamacare yet????

tsk, tsk, tsk.

 

Seriously, hope those folks make a full recovery!

[PhoenixCruiser]

Choosing a vacation over health insurance.....wow

 

###

[VernRDH]

Choosing a vacation over health insurance.....wow

 

###

 

My sentiments exactly. How much would travel insurance have helped? They have no MEDICAL insurance at all. No wonder no one wanted to treat them.

[barbie5401]

If they had bought the insurance for the trip would they still had to pay up front and then get reimbursed?

[FIRELT5]

If they had bought the insurance for the trip would they still had to pay up front and then get reimbursed?

 

Depends on the travel insurance policy.

[alexkrn46]

I did a stupid thing, I forgot all my prescription meds, luckly my travel insurance covers this.

[cruiseco]

If they had bought the insurance for the trip would they still had to pay up front and then get reimbursed?

 

It depends on the plan. For example, this is from a TravelSafe plan ($100,000 medical limit / $1,000,000 evac limit):

 

"Advance payment will be made to a Hospital, up to the Maximum Benefit Amount, if needed, to secure Your admission to a Hospital, because of a covered Sickness or Injury. The Program Medical Advisor will coordinate advance payment to the Hospital."

 

So with this plan the insurer would have advanced up to the plan limit ($100,000) for medical services. With every plan that I'm aware of the emergency evac payment is ALWAYS made upfront.

 

Note that these advance payments aren't necessarily a decision by the insurer to pay the underlying claim. For example, maybe after the police investigation it turns out that they were scootering under the influence -- an activity specifically excluded from the plan's coverage. The advance payment would then revert to a loan which the insured would be expected to re-pay -- a hard lesson learned by many stupid drunk Spring Breakers.

[Guest maddycat]

http://www.northjersey.com/news/033112_BAHAMASCRASH.html?c=y&page=1&scpromo=1

 

When I read this article in the Record this morning I thought about posting it on CC as a reminder that everyone should buy travel insurance. If they had purchased primary travel insurance they would have been covered.

 

As I continued reading the article I was appalled that they didn't have any health insurance at all. They could afford a vacation in the Bahamas but wouldn't spend the money for health insurance. Screwed up priorities. And then they were stupid enough to rent a scooter. I guess that they thought that they were invincible.

[sirwired]

Frankly, I'm surprised that the US cruise lines do not require evidence of insurance (both medical and medevac) as part of trip booking. (I know this is a requirement for UK travelers.)

 

Travelers just don't realize that some countries will simply not treat at all without advance payment. And no medevac company will evac you without payment arrangements either. Yes, even if this means you die as a result.

[cruise47]

We booked a cruise in Feb 2012 for November 2012. Is it to late to purchase travel insurance ?

[cruiseco]

We booked a cruise in Feb 2012 for November 2012. Is it to late to purchase travel insurance ?

 

Al of the major third-party insurers will sell you a policy up until the day prior to your departure. However, many will only cover pre-existing medical conditions if you buy your policy shortly after making the first payment on the trip (14 - 30 days depending on the plan usually).

 

If you need coverage for pre-existing medical conditions one option is CSA which will cover pre-existing conditions if the policy is bought by the FINAL payment date of your cruise. Travel Guard also has a plan with this feature.

 

Here's more:

 

http://www.travelinsurancebasics.com/whentobuy.php

[donaldsc]

Just my opinion but they made their choice when they decided that the trip was more important than insurance. They deserve no sympathy and should have been left where they were until they could come up with or guarantee payment.

 

DON

[cruise47]

Al of the major third-party insurers will sell you a policy up until the day prior to your departure. However, many will only cover pre-existing medical conditions if you buy your policy shortly after making the first payment on the trip (14 - 30 days depending on the plan usually).

 

If you need coverage for pre-existing medical conditions one option is CSA which will cover pre-existing conditions if the policy is bought by the FINAL payment date of your cruise. Travel Guard also has a plan with this feature.

 

Here's more:

 

http://www.travelinsurancebasics.com/whentobuy.php

 

Thanks for your post and information.

[CruisinGerman]

The World Health Organization, United Nations, the constitutions of most countries in the world consider emergency healthcare a universal right.

 

It is a downright disgrace, and illegal in most countries (even the United States with its capitalist healthcare system) to leave someone untreated on the sidewalk of a hospital in an emergency (non-elective) situation because of inability to pay.

 

Yes, the party in question should have purchased travel insurance and should have health insurance. But it is also a disgrace for a country whose roots are in the United Kingdom, to deny emergency care in this type of situation.

 

Kind regards,

 

Gunther and Uta

[6rugrats]

It is a downright disgrace, and illegal in most countries (even the United States with its capitalist healthcare system) to leave someone untreated on the sidewalk of a hospital in an emergency (non-elective) situation because of inability to pay.

 

Yes, the party in question should have purchased travel insurance and should have health insurance. But it is also a disgrace for a country whose roots are in the United Kingdom, to deny emergency care in this type of situation.

And people in the US do receive emergency healthcare whether they are insured or not.

 

I don't know what you are talking about. No one was left "untreated on the sidewalk". No one was "denied emergency care". This couple was treated in the hospital in the Bahamas.

 

I have read estimates of their continued care to be ~$250,000. They have no insurance. Guess who will pay for this? The US Taxpayer. And all they had to do is act like responsible adults and purchase a travel insurance policy for probably less thant $120 per person.

 

I am waiting for the news story that this couple is suing the place that rented them the scooter.

[sail7seas]

The World Health Organization, United Nations, the constitutions of most countries in the world consider emergency healthcare a universal right.

 

It is a downright disgrace, and illegal in most countries (even the United States with its capitalist healthcare system) to leave someone untreated on the sidewalk of a hospital in an emergency (non-elective) situation because of inability to pay.

 

Yes, the party in question should have purchased travel insurance and should have health insurance. But it is also a disgrace for a country whose roots are in the United Kingdom, to deny emergency care in this type of situation.

 

Kind regards,

 

Gunther and Uta

 

You need to reread the article.

 

No Emergency Room in the U.S. can refuse to treat anyone presenting there and requesting treatment.

 

These people were in the Bahamas when they had the accident. They never presented at a U.S. Hospital Emergency Room.

 

[CruisinGerman]

They were just sitting in a hospital room in The Bahamas. The Bahamas refused continued treatment (starting with an MRI) because of inability to pay.

 

If The Bahamas had lived up to the universal right to emergency healthcare, the patients' conditions would have been treated and they would not have worsened, as explained in the article.

 

Kind regards,

 

Gunther and Uta

[6rugrats]

They were just sitting in a hospital room in The Bahamas. The Bahamas refused continued treatment (starting with an MRI) because of inability to pay.

 

I am betting you can find information in that article where you personally can send a donation to help this couple receive their "universal right to health care" that you think they deserve.

 

I don't have to do so, because as a US taxpayer, I'm already footing the bill for their irresponsibility and foolishness.

[CruisinGerman]

Just because a young couple was foolish and thought themselves invincible, doesn't mean they deserve to nearly die in a hospital room because of refusal of treatment.

 

Isn't that part of the problem you folks have in the United States that we don't have in other countries?

 

Young people think they don't need, or can't afford, health insurance, and then lo and behold, things like this happen.

 

And then Obama comes along and tries to pave the way for everyone to obligatorily have health insurance, and you folks don't seem to want that, either.

 

If you could only get your act together in the United States, you could have the best healthcare system in the world, since in many other categories you have the number 1 of everything. But for now, you are only considered to rank 37 in the world in terms of quality of healthcare, and many of you would be very surprised to see some of the countries that rank ahead of you.

 

Kind regards,

 

Gunther and Uta

[donaldsc]

You need to reread the article.

 

No Emergency Room in the U.S. can refuse to treat anyone presenting there and requesting treatment.

 

 

 

 

People who can afford health insurance but decide not to because they want the big car, big screen TV and big trip should get what they deserve - no treatment. I do without some things so that I can pay for insurance. Why should I have to pay for the people who decide not to?

 

This may sound harsh but I say "let them die".

 

Of course, this does not apply to the people who can not afford insurance - they are a different case.

 

Not sure how you would differentiate between the 2 groups of people at the emergency room but there should be some way of doing it.

 

DON

[6rugrats]

Just because a young couple was foolish and thought themselves invincible, doesn't mean they deserve to nearly die in a hospital room because of refusal of treatment.

That's a bit dramatic. I see no report that either person "nearly died" in a hospital room, and they did receive treatment.

 

 

But for now, you are only considered to rank 37 in the world in terms of quality of healthcare, and many of you would be very surprised to see some of the countries that rank ahead of you.

 

 

This #37 ranking is based on a report released nearly a decade ago by the World Health Organization(WHO) and relies on statistics that are even older and incomplete. Philip Musgrove, the editor-in-chief of the WHO report that accompanied the rankings, calls the figures that resulted from this step "so many made-up numbers," and the result a "nonsense ranking."

 

Prof. Murray, now director of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington, Seattle, says that "the biggest problem was just data" -- or the lack thereof, in many cases. He says the rankings are now "very old," and acknowledges they contained a lot of uncertainty.

 

The U.S. actually ranked a lot higher; it actually placed 15th overall, based on its performance in the five criteria used in the ranking. But for the most widely publicized form of its rankings, the WHO took the additional step of adjusting for national health expenditures per capita, to calculate each country's health-care bang for its bucks. Because the U.S. ranked first in spending, that adjustment pushed its ranking down to 37th. Dominica, Costa Rica and Morocco ranked 42nd, 45th and 94th before adjusting for spending levels, compared to the U.S.'s No. 15 ranking. After adjustment, all three countries ranked higher than the U.S.

 

Yet, I think I would prefer to receive health care in the US than any one of these other countries.

 

This "study" is a perfect example of Garbage In = Garbage Out.

[CruisinGerman]

U.S. Healthcare has not improved over the last decade -- totally the opposite. I would hate to see what it would rank today.

 

No, they were not "dying" in the hospital room, but the newspaper article said their condition was worsening rather quickly.

 

In any case, I'm in the minority on this thread. I am not going to continue disputing all of my fellow cruisers' posts about how they deserve what they got, etc.

 

Inhumanity and insensitivity is alive and well on Cruise Critic.

 

 

Kind regards,

 

Gunther and Uta

[6rugrats]

I can't debate US healthcare with someone who is relying on a flawed old study, and histrionic news reports which distort the facts.

 

The majority of posters do not seem to think people deserve to be hurt. They merely think people should accept responsibility for themselves. These are not the same thing. I am happy they are back home receiving medical care. I am not happy because as a taxpayer, I have to pay for someone's irresponsibility.

[sharpasice]

It depends on the plan. For example, this is from a TravelSafe plan ($100,000 medical limit / $1,000,000 evac limit):

 

"Advance payment will be made to a Hospital, up to the Maximum Benefit Amount, if needed, to secure Your admission to a Hospital, because of a covered Sickness or Injury. The Program Medical Advisor will coordinate advance payment to the Hospital."

 

So with this plan the insurer would have advanced up to the plan limit ($100,000) for medical services. With every plan that I'm aware of the emergency evac payment is ALWAYS made upfront.

 

Note that these advance payments aren't necessarily a decision by the insurer to pay the underlying claim. For example, maybe after the police investigation it turns out that they were scootering under the influence -- an activity specifically excluded from the plan's coverage. The advance payment would then revert to a loan which the insured would be expected to re-pay -- a hard lesson learned by many stupid drunk Spring Breakers.

 

 

We will be traveling with Celebrity next year in April..I did add their insurance onto the price of the cruise. One of the reasons is that it covers pre-existing conditions, my husband is a diabetic. Can I combine Celebrity's insurance with maybe another policy that doesn't cover pre-existing but does cover a larger amt for medical and evacuation? We work with a tight budget and I am finding it very difficult to get the full premium for a policy that cover everything including preexisting..as Travelex does have a policy that covers pre existing if bought before the final cruise payment but it is in the $300 range..any ideas would be appreciated..thank you.