$550,000 medical bills

[youbet]

How sad that Sarah Burke died in the tragic accident at only 29 yo. In pics around the web, she looked so happy, friendly and vibrant.

After reading many positive comments regarding the Canadian Health Care System on this forum, I was surprised to read that this same system coldly ignored the needs of one of their own, Sarah Burke. What were they thinking? Why would they not provide her the care she needed and would have received had the accident occured on their side of the border?

Since Sarah was a member of their system and since she did not have the resources to pay for the care herself, how could the Canadians ignore her and watch this grow into an ugly situation? Was the strategy to punish her for not taking out the appropriate extra insurance from Canada for coverage outside the country?

Thanks to all the generous folks who eventually picked up the tab.

Shame on Canadians for abandoning one of their own. This was no time to deny coverage on the technicality that she was not on Canadian soil.

Edit: This article seems to be more factual and informative than the Huffington Post article provided by OP. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...=feeds-newsxml

The bill was about $200k, not $550k. Her husband Rory was being chased for payment. Donors more than covered all of the bill with quite a bit left over. Sarah did have supplemental performance insurance but those folks weenied out through a clause that said it only covered sanctioned events. Sarah was hurt while practicing.

Although the facts take some of the sensationalism out of the whole story, it still leaves the Canadian system looking a bit cold hearted in how they treated Sarah and her family.

The "eye opener" for me was discovering how bad/inaccurate the Huffington Post article was. And that the Canadian gov't, Sarah's insurer, is paying so little of the bill for her care.

[Chuckanut]

I have yet to meet a Canadian or a Brit who would trade their heath care system for the US system. They may be out there, but I have not met one yet.

[youbet]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuckanut I have yet to meet a Canadian or a Brit who would trade their heath care system for the US system. They may be out there, but I have not met one yet.

Perhaps you need to ask Sarah's husband, Rory, how he feels about the non-paying (in this case) Canadian system. But, generally, I agree that comments about the Canadian system are usually positive. Why do you think the Canadians acted so horribly wrong in this particular situation? Have you seen the pics of Sarah on the web? She seems like a happy, friendly, young person. Why would the Canadian authorities and their system single her out to not cover? I don't get it. As you say, Canadians seem to really like their system. Certainly the Canadian public would not approve of this treatment of one of their own.

Note that the article I posted is a UK article.

Remember, we're not talking about the USA health insurance system here. Sarah is a Canadian who held both Canadian coverage (that amazingly did nothing for her - unbelievable) and private coverage that was only for sanctioned events.

[Chuckanut]

I think it is best to let any Canadians comment on their system. They know it best.

[youbet]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuckanut I think it is best to let any Canadians comment on their system. They know it best.

I suppose. But do you agree with the Canadians not helping their fellow citizen Sarah Burke? No need to comment on their whole system. Canadians comment on aspects of the USA health care system (whatever that is.......) freely and I expect would welcome our opinions on this specific case.

The original post opening the thread certainly brought up an interesting issue. With so many millions of non-citizens inside our borders at any given moment, does any future national health care plan we establish need to provide coverage for them while they are here? Should visitors, such as Sarah, be covered gratis and automatically?

The example of Sarah Burke clearly indicates that the Canadian system washed their hands of responsibility. I don't think they should have. I wonder how many other countries with injuried or ill citizens visiting the USA would have handled it that way. And I wonder how we should handle the issue of uninsured visitors needing expensive and perhaps scarce care in the future.

Perhaps this isn't the angle OP had in mind when he started the thread, but that's what it is. It's a big, highly populated world out there.

[ERD50]

Quote:

Originally Posted by youbet How sad that Sarah Burke died in the tragic accident at only 29 yo. In pics around the web, she looked so happy, friendly and vibrant. After reading many positive comments regarding the Canadian Health Care System on this forum, I was surprised to read that this same system coldly ingnord the needs of one of their own, Sarah Burke. What were they thinking? Why would they not provide her the care she needed and would have received had the accident occured on their side of the border?

And this is one of the things that I thought the OP might be referring to as an 'eye opener'. So many ways to interpret that line.

Quote:

The "eye opener" for me was discovering how bad/inaccurate the Huffington Post article was.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuckanut I have yet to meet a Canadian or a Brit who would trade their heath care system for the US system. They may be out there, but I have not met one yet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuckanut I think it is best to let any Canadians comment on their system. They know it best.

For a minute, I thought your location 'Redmond' referred to Redmond, OT.

redmond, ontario, canada - Google Maps

-ERD50

[Hamlet]

It's human and understandable.

Does it really matter though if the student hit by the drunk driver was an straight A student? Would it be less tragic if they were struggling to get accepted to a bad community college?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ERD50 I don't know what you mean by 'shrug off' a death. Any death is tragic. But yes, I have a little different gut feeling when someone dies pursuing an activity that they enjoy, when they know full well it is a very dangerous thing to do (and it is probably the danger that is part of the attraction). It's still tragic, it's sad, but it is different from hearing that a straight A student who just graduated was killed by a drunk driver when they were doing nothing wrong. If it's wrong for me to feel that way, I'm sorry, I'll just have to chalk it up to being human. -ERD50

[growing_older]

A system in which anyone visiting a country is automatically covered for all medical expenses for free is obviously unworkable and would be subject to unmanageable adverse selection, among other issues. But a system which covers all citizens in a national healthcare system could have provisions to cover those same individuals while traveling, perhaps with some restrictions. I'm very surprised that the "restrictions" seem to amount to zero coverage while traveling and wonder why these systems are set up that way.

[Brat]

Many American health insurance policies to not cover accidents or illnesses outside the US.

IMHO she (and her husband) should have purchased insurance for their activities outside of CN. Now we are paying for her unreimbursed care.

[Grainiac]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FIREd France does have a reciprocity agreement with a number of European and non-European countries (including the US).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan That's pretty generous considering the cost disparity.

+1

I bet very few countries in the world have that kind of reciprocity agreement with the USA. I understand most EU countries only have it with the other EU countries. How does it work with the US emergency healthcare providers? French citizen just tell the ER personnel to send the bill to the French Embassy? No coverage limit? I have heard about intensive care bills of over $1M after a bad car accident.

I always advice my European relatives who come to visit in the USA get a travellers insurance with unlimited medical and repatriation flight coverages.

[Nemo2]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ERD50 For a minute, I thought your location 'Redmond' referred to Redmond, OT. redmond, ontario, canada - Google Maps -ERD50

Ontario would be ON rather than OT.

[Nemo2]

Quote:

Originally Posted by youbet Perhaps you need to ask Sarah's husband, Rory, how he feels about the non-paying (in this case) Canadian system. But, generally, I agree that comments about the Canadian system are usually positive. Why do you think the Canadians acted so horribly wrong in this particular situation? Have you seen the pics of Sarah on the web? She seems like a happy, friendly, young person. Why would the Canadian authorities and their system single her out to not cover? I don't get it. As you say, Canadians seem to really like their system. Certainly the Canadian public would not approve of this treatment of one of their own. Note that the article I posted is a UK article. Remember, we're not talking about the USA health insurance system here. Sarah is a Canadian who held both Canadian coverage (that amazingly did nothing for her - unbelievable) and private coverage that was only for sanctioned events.

As I linked to earlier, Canadian, (available to eligible residents on a per-Province basis), health care coverage has, (I believe), full Provincial reciprocity within Canada but provides minimal coverage outside the country.......therefore travelers are exhorted to ensure that they have appropriate insurance coverage......especially for the US where the cost differential for hospital treatment is so much higher than at home.

Sarah Burke was not 'singled out', the onus was on her, as it is on all Canadians, (and we're all well aware of this), to obtain suitable insurance; although, since she was apparently engaged in a dangerous, non-sanctioned event, she may have considered the premiums prohibitive.......if she could've found an insurance company willing to take the risk of covering her.

[Hamlet]

People keep saying she didn't purchase insurance.

She did.

Sadly, it only covered the events themselves, not practices. It's very likely that she was unaware of this gap, as it is certainly a feature that was probably not hightlighted by whoever sold her the insurance (since it really makes the policy kinda useless from a covering risk standpoint).

Hopefully, the people in her profession will take this opportunity to make sure that their policies don't have the same loophole.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nemo2 Sarah Burke was not 'singled out', the onus was on her, as it is on all Canadians, (and we're all well aware of this), to obtain suitable insurance; although, since she was apparently engaged in a dangerous, non-sanctioned event, she may have considered the premiums prohibitive.......if she could've found an insurance company willing to take the risk of covering her.

[Nemo2]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hamlet People keep saying she didn't purchase insurance. She did. Sadly, it only covered the events themselves, not practices.

Ergo, she didn't purchase full insurance.......especially since she likely would have spent more time practicing in preparation than actually competing.

Regardless....the insurance wouldn't have, (and didn't), saved her life.

Sad, I fully agree.

[Bestwifeever]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brat Many American health insurance policies to not cover accidents or illnesses outside the US. IMHO she (and her husband) should have purchased insurance for their activities outside of CN. Now we are paying for her unreimbursed care.

At least in Sarah Burke's case, "we" are not paying for her unreimbursed care unless we made a donation to it: Sarah Burke's medical bills covered by donations - British Columbia - CBC News

Quote:

Donations from the public mean freestyle skier Sarah Burke's medical bills will not create a financial burden for her family, her agent has confirmed.

[Lsbcal]

Speaking in my (reflective) blue rabbit persona for a moment:

Quote:

I ask myself, why are these nice ER humans arguing so much about the health care situation of a now dead young skier? I like young attractive people taking risks. It's too bad when those risks come home to roost, sort of like a small rabbit being taken off by a hawk. Of course, rabbits do not take extreme risks. Rabbits just like to live, eat, and make more rabbits. I also like medical people who want to help them at any cost. Then there are the medical bills, nobody likes them -- not even me. And those Canadians are just great people. Fortunately blue rabbits do not worry about assigning blame. Probably because blue rabbits won't be paying medical bills any time soon.

[Alan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FIREd France does have a reciprocity agreement with a number of European and non-European countries (including the US).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan That's pretty generous considering the cost disparity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grainiac +1 I bet very few countries in the world have that kind of reciprocity agreement with the USA. I understand most EU countries only have it with the other EU countries. How does it work with the US emergency healthcare providers? French citizen just tell the ER personnel to send the bill to the French Embassy? No coverage limit? I have heard about intensive care bills of over $1M after a bad car accident. I always advice my European relatives who come to visit in the USA get a travellers insurance with unlimited medical and repatriation flight coverages.

Note that FIRE'd did a little more checking and found that France only pays what it would cost in France and advises its citizens traveling to the USA to purchase additional insurance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FIREd After researching the subject some more, there are restrictions on the amount of coverage (full reciprocity applies only in specific situations). In the US, health care services are covered up to what similar services would cost in France. So, they do encourage people to contract additional coverage when traveling to countries with expensive health care services, like the US.

[FinanceDude]

It says the event she fell at was one of her sponsors, Monster Energy. She was not covered under her Canadien Freestyle Association medical policy because the Monster Energy event was non-sanctioned. I think Monster Energy can claim no responsiblity but I think there will be a civil suit settled out of court for an undisclosed amount at some point.........

[DangerMouse]

Australia has reciprocal health agreements with the following countries.

New Zealand
The United Kingdom
The Republic of Ireland
Sweden
The Netherlands
Finland
Italy
Belgium
Malta
Norway
Slovenia

I don't believe it likely that any country would want to enter into a reciprocal agreement with the USA because of the inflated costs for medical treatment. Also you would develop a system where people would become medical tourists. I would say that in the Australian case, that each of those countries we have a reciprocal agreement with likely has a national health system.

[jayc]

Quote:

Originally Posted by obgyn65 Well people make mistakes. For example, most people are overweight, others smoke, many have unprotected sex or play unsafe sports. Does it mean we have to make them pay thousands, if not tens of thousands of dollars, when something goes wrong

Yes. The SAME people that makes the mistake/decision should be the SAME person that pays.