How to Buy Travel Medical Insurance, the ‘Other’ Travel Insurance

Travel SERAPH

No one wants to imagine being sick or injured on vacation; but if the worst happens, it pays (literally) to be prepared. Medical travel insurance can save you considerable hassle, time and money, and offer you peace of mind if you encounter health problems while traveling. But it’s also somewhat separate from most standard forms of travel insurance. While most common—and commonly needed—travel insurance is trip-cancellation (TCI) protection, you should certainly consider medical risks when you’re looking at your travel insurance options, up to and including emergency medical evacuation (also called “medevac”) assistance.

Who Needs Travel Medical Insurance?

The quick answer to that question is: Anyone who isn’t covered by their regular medical insurance when they’re traveling. More specifically, that means:

  • Anyone whose regular health insurance/HMO doesn’t pay for services outside the U.S. There was a time when most private health insurance—and most HMOs—covered you (and emergency medevac assistance) wherever you went, but that’s no longer the case. With relentless cutbacks in benefits in recent years, many standard health insurance programs will no longer cover medical bills in foreign countries. And most do not cover medevac.
  • Any senior dependent on Medicare. Medicare will not pay for anything outside the U.S. Even if you have a Medicare supplement that nominally covers foreign travel, benefits are so meager that you might need additional insurance.

Everyone should check their health insurance and travel insurance’s overseas medical benefits before leaving the country for a trip. If coverage is either slim or nonexistent, you likely need travel medical insurance.

It’s also worth noting that the medical benefits in many travel insurance policies are secondary, which means the insurance pays only for what you can’t claim from your regular health insurer/HMO. On the off chance that you already have good foreign-country coverage, additional travel insurance is probably a waste of money.

Bundled Medical Coverage

Almost all travel insurance bundles include a combination of TCI and medical benefits. For example, for a two-week trip to Europe the least expensive bundled policy might be a few hundred dollars (total) for two people. This usually covers a few thousand dollars in TCI plus somewhere around $50,000 in medical/dental emergency costs per person, and $50,000 in medical evacuation expenses per person. That’s about the minimum coverage: If you think you need more, you could buy a policy providing TCI plus $100,000 in medical emergency and $500,000 medevac per person for slightly more money.

But if you don’t want the TCI, you can buy just the medical coverage, and adjust according to your needs. On a sample trip I tested, I could buy greatly reduced coverage ($5,000 medical, $25,000 medevac) for about $100 total. Or, conversely, I could pay $195 for $100,000 in medical coverage, per person, plus unlimited medevac costs.

For travel to developed countries, my opinion is that $50,000 in medical and $50,000 medevac would more than cover any foreseeable risks. Travel to less developed areas, however, might call for slightly higher limits. It’s ultimately your call.

Yearly Medical and Medevac Coverage

If you travel a lot, you might consider buying medical/medevac insurance by the year (or per six months) rather than per trip. A low-benefit policy for frequent travelers offering about $10,000 in medical and $25,000 in medevac on each trip can cost about $100 per year (for one person). A more generous travel medical insurance policy covering $100,000 medical and unlimited medevac per trip costs about double that for one year (for one person). These policies are designed for travelers who make several short trips each year; policies for long-term overseas trips or extended business assignments might be priced differently.

Medevac: The Fine Print

Most medevac policies I’ve seen call for transport to either the nearest appropriate medical facility or back to the U.S., depending on the circumstances. Typically, that means you start at a local or regional hospital. The insurance pays for transport back to the U.S. only when, in the opinion of the attending physician, local/regional facilities are inadequate.

When you need medevac, the insurance company calls all the shots. That means you must, from the beginning, make all arrangements through the insurance company or its local agents. If you jump the gun and make your own arrangements, chances are the insurance company won’t cover them.

Can Your Credit Card Help?

Several premium credit cards provide lesser travel medical insurance in an emergency in a foreign country. Although the language in the card literature might seem to promise a lot, what you typically get is a referral to file claims, and not any genuine assistance.

The fine print for the AmEx Platinum card, for example, says, “Whenever you travel, have peace of mind knowing that you have 24/7 medical, legal, financial, and other emergency assistance while traveling more than 100 miles from home. We can direct you to English-speaking medical and legal professionals and arrange for a transfer to a more appropriate medical facility, even if an air ambulance is required.” Note that it says “arrange for,” not “pay for.” What you get is help in making arrangements; the cost of those arrangements goes right on your credit card bill, unless moving you is deemed “medically necessary.” As far as I know, most other cards operate the same way.

How to Choose Travel Medical Insurance

The medical risks you face when traveling outside the U.S. are hard to quantify. Basically, the chances of facing a major medical problem are small—very small, for medevac—but the financial consequences of a serious event are potentially quite large.

Fortunately, travel health insurance prices are not bad. As with all travel insurance, my suggestion is that you check with one or two of the online travel insurance agencies, enter your personal details, trip details, and the coverages you want, and select the least expensive policy that meets your needs. Some of the major agencies include InsureMyTrip.comSquaremouth, and QuoteWright.

Consumer advocate Ed Perkins has been writing about travel for more than three decades. The founding editor of the Consumer Reports Travel Letter, he continues to inform travelers and fight consumer abuse every day at SmarterTravel.

Anti-natalists: Don’t Like Babies And Want You To Stop Having Them!

NOTE: Many of these people suffer from mental health issues, radical – even violent ideas.

Many highly educated leadership type people in the U.S. and EU are childless by choice. This is not only unhealthy but a dangerous trend. Dale Yeager

They believe humans shouldn’t have children. Who are the anti-natalists – and how far are they willing to push their ideas?

“Wouldn’t it just be better to blow a hole in the side of the earth and just have done with everything?”

Thomas, 29, lives in the east of England, and although his idea of blowing up the world is something of a thought experiment, he is certain about one thing – humans should not have babies, and our species should gradually go extinct.

It’s a philosophy called anti-natalism. While the idea dates back to ancient Greece, it has recently been given a huge boost by social media.

On Facebook and Reddit, there are dozens of anti-natalist groups, some with thousands of members. On Reddit, r/antinatalism has nearly 35,000 members, while just one of the dozens of Facebook groups with an anti-natalist theme has more than 6,000.

They are scattered around the world and have a variety of reasons for their beliefs. Among them are concerns about genetic inheritance, not wanting children to suffer, the concept of consent, and worries about overpopulation and the environment.

But they are united in their desire to stop human procreation. And although they are a fringe movement, some of their views, particularly on the state of the earth, are increasingly creeping into mainstream discussion.

While not an anti-natalist, the Duke of Sussex recently said he and his wife were planning to have a maximum of two children, because of environmental concerns.

Philosophical chat

Thomas hadn’t heard of anti-natalism before someone used the term to describe his views in a YouTube comments thread a few years ago. Since then, he’s become an active member of an anti-natalist Facebook group. It provides him with intellectual stimulation and a place to test his debating skills.

“I think it’s awesome, you’re discussing real life problems,” he says. “You’ve got an idea – let’s say humans do go extinct. What if humans then evolve again? Then you haven’t really solved the problem.

“There’s a lot of discussion, some of it gets quite touchy.”

But his passion for anti-natalism isn’t only theoretical. Thomas believes all human life is purposeless and has tried, although not succeeded, in getting a vasectomy on Britain’s National Health Service (NHS). NHS doctors can refuse to perform sterilisation operations if they believe the procedure is not in the best interests of the patient.

Non-violence and consent

Despite some of the nihilist rhetoric in anti-natalist groups, there’s no indication that they’re a violent threat. When they do talk about extinction it often feels as though it’s a debating exercise. No-one in their online communities is threatening murder or violence.

Thomas’s idea of blowing a hole in the side of the earth – he imagines a big red button that would end human life and says he’d “press that in an instant” – is actually highly controversial because of a key anti-natalist principle: consent.

Put simply, it’s the idea that creating or destroying life requires the consent of the person who will be born or die.

Kirk lives in San Antonio, Texas. He says he recalls a conversation with his mother when he was just four years old. She told him that having children was a choice.

“This doesn’t make any sense to me, to voluntarily put someone who has no needs or wants prior to their conception into this world to suffer and die,” he says.

Kirk says that even at that young age, he became an anti-natalist. He opposes the creation of human life because none of us were explicitly asked if we wanted to be here.

“If every person gave consent to play the game of life then I personally wouldn’t have any objection to that,” he concedes. “It hinges on the consent or lack thereof.”

The concept also works in reverse. The problem with that big red humanity-eraser button is that plenty of people enjoy life – and not everyone would consent to it all coming to an end. Instead, Kirk and most anti-natalists want people to volunteer to stop giving birth.

A finger hovering over a end humanity big red button

Mental health issues

There’s another distinct theme common in anti-natalist groups. Posters frequently share experiences of their own mental health, and occasionally condemn those with mental health problems for having children.

One post included a screenshot of a post from another user that read: “I have a borderline personality disorder, in addition to bipolar and generalized anxiety”. The anti-natalist added their own comment: “This individual has two kids. I feel bad for the kiddos”.

In another group, there was also a comment where someone was clearly contemplating suicide.

“I’ve had schizophrenia and depression,” Thomas explains. “Depression does run in my family too. I think if I have kids there’s a high likelihood that they’re going to be depressed and they’re not going to like their life.”

But he also says the community is often wrongly labelled by outsiders.

“People start labelling us crazy psychos,” he says. The truth, he says, is much more complex.

A man holding his head

Saving the earth?

Fuelling anti-natalist arguments in recent years is an increasing focus on the environment and the potentially devastating effects of climate change.

Judging from posts in the anti-natalist groups, there’s clearly a large overlap between their ideas and environmental activism.

“I feel that it is selfish to have children at this time,” adds Nancy a vegan, plastic-free, animal rights enthusiast and yoga instructor from the Philippines.”The reality is that the children being born into the world are creating more destruction for the environment.”

In a Facebook group called “very angry anti-natalists” a petition is being shared which they hope to send to the United Nations. Its title is “Overpopulation root of the climate catastrophe – worldwide birth stop now.” So far it has 27,000 signatures.

The idea of refraining from having children to benefit the environment isn’t a new one. In Britain a charity called Population Matters has proposed this for years – although they are not anti-natalists. In fact, they argue in favour of the sustainability of the human race rather than its extinction.

“Our aim is to achieve harmony between the human race and the planet we’re fortunate to inhabit,” says Robin Maynard, the group’s director. “If we have fewer children across the globe and smaller families we can achieve a much more sustainable population.”

But will an increasing population necessarily lead directly to environmental disaster? According to the BBC’s Global Population Correspondent Stephanie Hegarty, it’s hard to say, because the future is so difficult to predict.

“According to scientific projections, due to economic development and dropping fertility rates, the population of the world is likely to plateau at about 11 billion in 80 years,” she says. “Whether the planet can sustain that or not – we do not know.

“It’s also very difficult to predict how many people the planet can sustain because it’s all about consumption. And that means everything from air, water, food, fossil fuels, wood, plastic – the list goes on and on,” she says. “Clearly some of us are consuming a lot more than others. A family of 12 in a country like Burundi will consume less, on average, than a family of three in Texas.

“There are so many factors that are going to be changing over the next decade and the next century that we can’t predict right now.”

A crowd of people stood outside a factory

Insults and criticism

Among the intense philosophical and ethical debates going on anti-natalist groups, there’s a darker and less edifying undercurrent. Some routinely insult parents – calling them “breeders”. Other slurs are directed at children.

“Whenever I see a pregnant woman, disgust is the first feeling.” wrote one user next to a picture that said: “I hate baby bump”.

But that doesn’t mean that all anti-natalists hate children, according to those who spoke to the BBC.

“I would say I personally like children and it is because I like them that I don’t want them to suffer,” Nancy says. “Maybe bringing them into the world would give me some pleasure but the possible threat is so huge I’m just not sure it’s worth it.”

Media captionGoing childless for the environment

But that’s not the only criticism. In some anti-natalist groups, users allude to the notion that babies shouldn’t be born in war zones, if there is a high chance of disability, or even to low-income parents. At times the rhetoric sounds like selective breeding – or eugenics.

The anti-natalists we spoke to had mixed feelings about those ideas.

“What are their motives behind having a kid?” says Thomas when asked if he’s concerned about children being born in war-torn areas. “In such a country there’s less hope that things are going to turn around.”

He’s more relaxed about children being born into low-income households.

“Obviously I’m against having kids… but I think you can be happy and in a low-income area.”

“My anti-natalism is across the board,” states Nancy. She opposes eugenics. “Why are we picking and choosing some groups because they are in a position of disadvantage?”

So is there a general anti-natalist life philosophy?

“Do the best you can,” says Kirk. “Be kind – and don’t procreate.”

Blog by Jonathan Griffin

Mass Shootings: Millennials’ Loneliness Plague

A third of US millennials feel lonely, per a recent YouGov survey, and a fifth say they have no friends, notes The Week’s Matthew Walther.

And while “we can make facile jokes about avocado toast and baristas with degrees in cultural studies” he is “not sure we should find them amusing.”

The crisis of modern loneliness is but one facet of an atomized, soulless society: “We cannot concentrate on anything. We don’t go anywhere, not even to buy food or diapers. . . . The richer we happen to be, the less likely we are to take time off to enjoy ourselves, despite generous vacation allowances.

The poorer we are, the more likely we are to kill ourselves with drugs, alcohol and guns. Even fornication is boring — we have porn for that.”

Ohio Shooter Extreme Leftist – Texas Shooter Extreme Right Wing: Mass Shootings Not About Politics Something Scarier

Connor Betts / Patrick Crusius

For political types the recent mass shootings in Ohio and Texas are about ideology, sadly they are blinded by their own dogma.

Let’s look at the facts:

Dayton, Ohio – Shooter Connor Betts

  • He wore a mask, Ballistic vest and ear protection.

ASSESSMENT He was not a suicide shooter, he planned on escaping and concealing his identity. This is unusual for this type of crime.

  • He came to the event with his sister in the same vehicle but ended up killing her.

ASSESSMENT This means that there was a personal element.

  • He was a Sexual Sadist.

A classmate told the Daily News that Betts had “fantasized about tying her up and slitting her throat” and he told her he was scared he had those thoughts. She said she was included on a hit list, but her concerns weren’t taken seriously when she reported them.

“found a notebook where he reportedly wrote a list of people who he wanted to rape, kill and skin their bodies.”

  • He classified himself on social media as:

“leftist”

“i’m going to hell and i’m not coming back.”

he would happily vote for Democrat Elizabeth Warren

praised Satan, “#selfie4satan #HailSatan @SatanTweeting.” 

was upset about the 2016 presidential election results

“I want socialism, and i’ll not wait for the idiots to finally come round to understanding.”

  • He was a psychology major.
  • Suspended during his high school years for compiling a “hit list” of those he wanted to kill and a “rape list” of girls he wanted to sexually assault.

ASSESSMENT while the police investigated, and the school system suspected him. He was not charged allegedly with a crime and after a short time, school officials allowed him back to the school.

  • Graduated From Bellbrook High School, Where Students Considered Him a Bully 

El Paso, Texas – Shooter Patrick Crusius

  • He was a loner.

ASSESSMENT This type of behavior is not healthy or biologically normal. Humans seek connection with others.

  • Manifesto on 8chan was unusual.

Stated his Ideology predated Trump.

MESSIAH COMPLEX “I can no longer bear the shame of inaction knowing that our founding fathers have endowed me with the rights needed to save our country from the brink destruction. 

USES MARXIST TERMS “Our European comrades don’t have the gun rights needed to repel the millions of invaders that plaque (sic) their country. People who are hypocrites because they support imperialistic wars that have caused the loss of tens of thousands of American lives and untold numbers of civilian lives. 

“My death is likely inevitable. If I’m not killed by the police, then I’ll probably be gunned down by one of the invaders. Capture in this case if far worse than dying during the shooting because I’ll get the death penalty anyway. Worse still is that I would live knowing that my family despises me. This is why I’m not going to surrender even if I run out of ammo. If I’m captured, it will be because I was subdued somehow. Remember: it is not cowardly to pick low hanging fruit. AKA Don’t attack heavily guarded areas to fulfill your super soldier COD fantasy. Attack low security targets. Even though you might out gun a security guard or police man, they likely beat you in armor, training and numbers. Do not throw away your life on an unnecessarily dangerous target,” he wrote. “If a target seems too hot, live to fight another day.”

ASSESSMENT He moves from fatalism about his life to regard for life.

  • LinkedIn Page, Cruscius Says He’s ‘Not Really Motivated to do Anything More Than What’s Necessary to Get By’

ASSESSMENT This type of personality trait is common in children who come from overprotective parents who create a codependency in their children or parents who have an emotional disconnect and no accountability for their children’s behaviors. Parenting from the extremes.

Conclusion

In my experience mass shooters have three things in common:

  1. Dysfunctional families. Codependency, lack of accountability and / or abuse.
  2. Mental health issues that are not dealt with by family and school officials.
  3. Isolation.

These shooters are created not born that way. Adults who should act in a mature or professional manner failed these people when they were children.

The use of child welfare laws to hold parents and caregivers accountable will go a long way towards reducing these crimes.

Dale Yeager

Sources:

https://heavy.com/news/2019/08/connor-betts/amp/

https://www.foxnews.com/us/dayton-ohio-shooting-suspect-hit-list