1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Should those who do dangerous sports take out 'rescue' insurance?

Discussion in 'Personal' started by monicabilongame, Sep 26, 2020.

  1. monicabilongame

    monicabilongame Star commenter

    just watching a programme on emergency rescue services - a climber in the Lake District in winter, who fell a long way down a mountain, damaged himself (lots of blood) and was extremely fortunate to still be alive, requiring 2 mountain rescue teams, rescue helicopter, hospital services etc. and who had to put themselves in jeopardy to rescue him...

    Should people who deliberately put themselves at risk in their sports or hobbies take out insurance against the thousands it costs to rescue them when it goes wrong?
  2. moscowbore

    moscowbore Star commenter

    They do
  3. bonxie

    bonxie Lead commenter

    It would make sense for those idiots who climb hills and mountains without appropriate equipment or checking weather forecasts.
    monicabilongame likes this.
  4. nomad

    nomad Star commenter

    The concept of billing outdoor enthusiasts who put themselves in harm's way is fine with me.

    Taking out insurance to cover the costs would be one way of offsetting costs. There would need to be some sort of omsbudsman to determine which rescues are chargeable and which are 'genuine'.
    monicabilongame likes this.
  5. stopwatch

    stopwatch Lead commenter

    They don't all take it out though, and those who don't, go walking in flip flops and a t-shirt, happily get rescued 'gratis' and get into the newspapers.
    It should be a similar mindset to driving a car without insurance. If you plan on doing any kind of potentially dangerous or risky outdoor pursuit, you should be legally and morally expected to insure yourself.
    If not, there should be a fine which is related to the cost of rescue.
    needabreak, monicabilongame and nomad like this.
  6. stopwatch

    stopwatch Lead commenter

    Genuine question - what kind of rescue would you class as 'genuine?
    For me it would be eg a group of experienced walkers/climbers, appropriately equipped, who left details of where they were going and when they should be back. If, for example, the weather changed unexpectedly or there was a genuine unavoidable injury, then that is good reason not to be charged anything.
  7. Aquamarina1234

    Aquamarina1234 Star commenter

    nomad likes this.
  8. nomad

    nomad Star commenter

    Sounds about right.
    needabreak likes this.
  9. hhhh

    hhhh Star commenter

    True, many do.
    But do they really cost the country more than people who don't exercise, eat rubbish and sit on the sofa all day? Or people who have many children, even if warned that another pregnancy could pose a particular risk?
    Or people who like to go to the pub, drink lots, and go home with random strangers, using no contraception?
    Or people who go out to do non essential things during a pandemic?
  10. modelmaker

    modelmaker Star commenter

    Not for me I'm afraid. The NHS was set up to help those afflicted by natural illnesses, for which they couldn't avoid. Any sport or activity that individuals choose to do that risks their health is down to them to sort out. The NHS is one of the greatest gifts a government ever gave to its people, but it it's there to provide medical help for that which is unavoidable, not for those who decide to risk their lives.

    If it was down to me, I would have insurance companies pay for every penny involved in the medical help required following road accidents, with the consequence that the lunatic drivers who menace our roads, can no longer afford the insurance for their w.ankmobiles as their vehicles and driving attitudes get diagnosed as the actual cause of road accidents and deaths of the roads.

    It's as simple as that. If you want to live dangerously, that's your choice. It's not down to the rest of us to bail you out if it ends up in tears. I'm more than happy to contribute to the medical procedures you need to keep you alive if nature gives you grief, but don't stretch our patience too far if you choose to live a reckless lifestyle.

    Who in their right mind wants to climb mountains anyway?
    monicabilongame likes this.
  11. chelsea2

    chelsea2 Star commenter

    Not sure where you would draw the line.
    Badminton - sprained / broken ankles.
    Jogging - tendon and feet problems.
    Croquet - hit on the head by a hard ball.
    Cycling - fall off and fracture skull.

    Every sport amd activity creates risks to health.
    But staying at home and doing nothing is far worse - heart attack, diabetes, etc.
  12. modelmaker

    modelmaker Star commenter

    The best thing you can do to ward off dementia is to maintain an active brain. you're more likely to be able to do that by being at home engaging with books or the Interweb, than you'll ever be able to with sport.

    Heart attacks and diabetes are more to do with poor dietary choices. Sport doesn't cure that.
  13. littlejackhorner

    littlejackhorner Senior commenter

    One of the big problems is that the lunatic drivers are often uninsured. Should the poor people who are injured by these lunatics not receive NHS help?

    Also, if your argument was followed to its logical conclusion, then alcoholics and drug addicts would receive no help, neither would many with cancer, strokes or heart disease as many of these things stem from lifestyle.
    I'm glad I live in a country where people's health is important and all are entitled to treatment, regardless of the causes.
  14. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    I guess you don't go in for any sporting activity or even watch any.
    nizebaby likes this.
  15. modelmaker

    modelmaker Star commenter

    Why on earth would anyone? What does it really matter who wins the FA cup, the World Snooker Championship or the International Tiddlywinks competition.

    For the sake of entertainment, it might be interesting to see how Frances de la Tour fared in the Tour de France if she'd entered it, but that's about it.

    If you like sport, I'm not going to stand in your way. I just draw the line at you coming crying to me for help if you were stupid enough to break your neck doing it. It's life, Madge. No different to you choosing to waste your life taking drugs. People make poor life choices when they don't need to, but if they do, it's down to them to face up to the fact it was their choice, and take ownership of it.
  16. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    You think participating in sport is no different from wasting a life taking drugs. I think that is a unique view. I almost feel sorry for you for missing out.
  17. modelmaker

    modelmaker Star commenter

    Missing out on what exactly?

    If God had wanted us to play tennis, he'd have given us rackets and balls. If he'd wanted us to play cricket he's have provided us with wickets and pads.

    What he did provide us with were sexual organs to mate with and the ability to gain far greater satisfaction from working up a sweat than is possible from a sport that involves umpires. Orgasms don't get disallowed over technicalities do they? Sex is a sport where both sides can win. You ought to try it if you get ever the chance.
  18. chelsea2

    chelsea2 Star commenter

    Sedentary lifestyles lead to poor health, regardless of diet.

    Exercise - of which sport is a major subset - helps maintain health. It can even help to cure illnesses such as diabetes ( Regular exercise can help you lose weight and increase insulin sensitivity) and prevent heart attacks (Being active and doing regular exercise will lower your blood pressure by keeping your heart and blood vessels in good condition. Regular exercise can also help you lose weight, which will help to lower your blood pressure).

    Why do you deem ill health due to lack of exercise OK for NHS treatment, but not accidents which happen when exercising? People fall over and damage themselves even when walking.
  19. chelsea2

    chelsea2 Star commenter

    Choosing not to exercise is a poor life choice - potential consequences are far worse and relatively more likely than those following sport and exercise.

    ETA And more costly, in the long-term, to the NHS.
  20. Corvuscorax20

    Corvuscorax20 Lead commenter

    sponsored sky diving for the NHS costs the NHS 10x more than it raises for them
    monicabilongame likes this.

Share This Page