Athletes Beware: Land of the Free, But Not Free Insurance
By Steve Casimiro, Adventure Journal on January 31st, 2012
Sarah Burke’s death has caused a lot of handwringing, both over the freak nature of the accident and over the kind of skiing she championed. And then there’s this: The simple fact that Canadian Burke’s injury occurred in Utah, not north of the border, left her family not only unfathomably grieved, but burdened with massive debt — somewhere between $200,000-$500,000 for nine days of intensive care. Of course she wasn’t insured in the U.S.; such an accident in Canada is covered by national health care. This argues heavily for mandatory insurance for any athlete, regardless of nationality, who comes to the land of the free, but not of free health care. Via MSNBC and the Center for Public Integrity.
Read more awesome outdoor stories like this at Adventure Journal.
My one question is why didn’t her Canadian insurance cover her in the U.S. I realize the system sucks, but my U.S. insurance would cover me if I were injured abroad.
Actually, most U.S. insurance does not cover you when you’re abroad. The problem in Japan grew so large that Yokota Air Base (and maybe many others) now requires visitors who stay more than a day to show proof of supplemental insurance. While Japan has an excellent national insurance system, it doesn’t cover foreigners. Obviously when athletes compete in a third world country, they know this. Now, maybe we get added to the list of third world countries?
Sad story, and my thoughts and good wishes are with Burke’s family. The question I would ask though is why did her care cost so much? In stories like this no one ever addresses this question. Health care flat out costs too much. Forcing the government to pay doesn’t solve this problem.
Actually, it costs a lot because that’s our system. I’m an old guy. While working for the U.S. government in Japan, I had a heart attack. Base hospitals are not prepared to treat that and I was sent to a Japanese hospital. Three (or was it 4?) days of intensive care, heart surgery (stent), a private room, and incredible food…really, at least for a hospital costs $19,000 approx. That’s less than half of what 1 day costs in the U.S. Our system sends folks who can’t afford or just don’t buy insurance to emergency rooms. They’re very expensive. Naturally, these folks don’t pay so our insurance and medical costs go up. The U.S. has average (at best) medical care but the most expensive of any nation in the world. We’ve allowed medical care to be a luxury - no other industrialized nation does this. Oh, and yes, I still have insurance - I’m one of the lucky ones.
Average medical care huh??? You’re outta your mind bro…
Look at the numbers on infant mortality…just for a start. While outstanding care can be bought here, it’s not available to the masses. Keep looking at the statistics. It will scare you. The only thing we’re still number one in is cost. We’re actually 37th by some evaluation methods. Here’s an easy place to start your research: http://healthvotes.com/general-health/19-countries-with-the-best-healthcare/1696/
Infant mortality, and many other medical quality metrics, are based on delivery of the care to the entire population. The US has excellent care available to some. Where we get nailed on the statistics is delivery of it and the cost to deliver it.
By available to some you must mean MOST. It’s roughly 10-15% of the population that does not have insurance.
Actually, it was 16% in 2009 (here’s my source http://www.gallup.com/poll/121820/one-six-adults-without-health-insurance.aspx) and roughly the same in 2010 (http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/13/news/economy/census_bureau_health_insurance/index.htm). The argument isn’t about the exact number - your response is a “straw dog” - it’s about excluding any, the cost to all, and the quality of the inclusion (remember - if you have a gap in insurance coverage, your new insurance company often claims a preexisting condition and doesn’t cover you. Just remember - we’re number 37. What do we do with our money that’s more important than keeping folks healthy? That’s philosophical, of course - you won’t need a source for the answer.
Lets say we do have the government take it over. Ever thought about the entire industry you have just now put in the unemployment line and the tax base you lost to help pay for your new health care system?
You’re kidding right? An athlete dies and now lobbyists are using a tragic death to push for socialist policies in the USA. Screw the lobbyists, screw the government.
The real failing is a shared responsibility between the athlete and sponsors. If you’re an extreme athlete you should work with your sponsors to get an appropriate level of insurance on yourself.
Ben - great question. Grizzly…never mind - lobbyists? - I’m an antique snowboarder - wow. If the gov does the right thing, no one…absolutely no one…loses their job. Today, we have national healthcare. We just do it through emergency rooms. That’s very expensive. We need to do it from the preventative side - not the emergency side. Is Obama’s system perfect? No way. Is it better? Absolutely. Think of a 25-year old male. Does he want to pay for insurance? No - we’re all immortal at that age…until we get sick, break an arm…whatever. If that happens, said mail goes to the ER and gets very expensive care…an usually doesn’t pay. That means all of us pay. The right way? Everyone pays from git-go. Then, we’re all paying our share.