Local girl injured at TL

[fosse76]

First off to MousDad, no ill will taken. I enjoy a good conversation!:wave:

Secondly, a water park is a luxury. If your family is lacking in a basic need then all funds should be used to rectify this situation. Whether it be purchasing the need outright or applying it to a longer term investment that will benefit the family (education, clothes for interviews).

It really is a black and white situation, from the facts that we have. Health insurance > Water park, both in cost and importance. Money should be spent on what is most important first, not luxuries.

No, it's not a balck and white issue, and you would have to be really stupid to believe that. As I said, there are a myriad of reasons a person does not have health insurance. The best example is the income qualifications. The parents can EASILY fall in between making too much for the state plan and too little for a private insurer. You can't purchase insurance if you can't afford it. And yes, while going to a water park is a luxury, should they just stay home because they don't qualify for insurance? Wait...they can be injured in the home. Maybe they should stay in a small padded room...let's hope they aren't allergic to the padding.

That aside, a lot of insurance companies won't cover people with known medical conditions, even if the insurance is paid for by an employer. But you cannot call a parent irresponsible for wanting to provide a day at a water park, which doesn't come close to what health insurance costs. You have no right to judge anyone for their decisions. Assuming the allegations to be true, that the water pressure was too high (a point that Disney has argued was possible), then Disney is completely liable, and insurance or not, would be responsible for ALL costs associated with the incident in question.

 

[jakeman]

No, it's not a balck and white issue, and you would have to be really stupid to believe that.

No not stupid, just able to see past self imposed limitations. My stance is if you don't have money for health care for your children, then you should not be at a water park and be spending that time and those resources to improve your financial situation.

And yes, while going to a water park is a luxury, should they just stay home because they don't qualify for insurance?

Yes. Not to be terribly snarky, but:

lux·u·ry –noun
1. a material object, service, etc., conducive to sumptuous living, usually a delicacy, elegance, or refinement of living rather than a necessity: Gold cufflinks were a luxury not allowed for in his budget.
2. free or habitual indulgence in or enjoyment of comforts and pleasures in addition to those necessary for a reasonable standard of well-being: a life of luxury on the French Riviera.
3. a means of ministering to such indulgence or enjoyment: This travel plan gives you the luxury of choosing which countries you can visit.
4. a pleasure out of the ordinary allowed to oneself: the luxury of an extra piece of the cake.
5. a foolish or worthless form of self-indulgence: the luxury of self-pity.
6. Archaic. ; lasciviousness; lechery.
–adjective 7. of, pertaining to, or affording luxury: a luxury hotel.

I don't think there is anything more to be gained with you and I discussing this. You are willing to indulge in the what if's and see that they justify spending money on a non-necessity rather than what is good for the family. I am not.

The world is going to keep going around and I doubt that family will be much affected by anything that is said here.

Nothing is personal in any of this, we just disagree. :wave:

 

[Roxas]

Seems like you guys across the pond need an NHS.

Seriously though going to hospital for a few scratches and bruises, isn't that what plasters (band-aid's) are for.

 

[fosse76]

Seems like you guys across the pond need an NHS.

Seriously though going to hospital for a few scratches and bruises, isn't that what plasters (band-aid's) are for.

We do...but the wealthier people in the country believe that if you can't afford it yourself then you don't deserve it. And yes, the actual incident being discussed is a little suspicious...if she had thousands of dollars in medical bills I can't imagine she would have just walked out of the park...was there a mention of an ambulance? Even if she had required stitches (which means bleeding, and if Disney doesn't close down pools of water with blood in it then someone needs to call the Public Health Department and report them), that's not much money. Stitches don't cost thousands of dollars.

 

[unkadug]

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that one. BTW-I mean you nor any other poster ill will.

I'm so darn curious now though. I might have to do a random survey of guests on my next trip to see how many have health insurance. Would that be weird? :lookaroun

I think it that would be really interesting.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

I think it that would be really interesting.

Oh I can imagine....

" excuse me sir do you have health cover?" "No? Well here's a list of attractions you cant use." " And youll have to sign a waver before you eat at our restaurants. "

You madam, your a bit of a porker, too risky the old ticker might give out, best go to Universal"

 

[macsmom]

Unless I read it wrong or forgot something from the article, when it said "Disney said", it was always what the victim said they said....Disney didn't say it - I hope that makes sense. She said "Disney said this...." Did Disney ever say to anyone that it has happened before or anything like that?

danna

 

[MousDad]

Oh I can imagine....

" excuse me sir do you have health cover?" "No? Well here's a list of attractions you cant use." " And youll have to sign a waver before you eat at our restaurants. "

You madam, your a bit of a porker, too risky the old ticker might give out, best go to Universal"

I was thinking I should do the survey at the entrance to Summit Plummet.

 

[bayoumoon]

Seems like you guys across the pond need an NHS.

Seriously though going to hospital for a few scratches and bruises, isn't that what plasters (band-aid's) are for.

I must say that I am a little "green eyed" after watching Sicko and although I could never live in England I have considered moving north to Canada for the same reason. I'd love to have a national coverage.

 

[sar1980sweetie]

I must say that I am a little "green eyed" after watching Sicko and although I could never live in England I have considered moving north to Canada for the same reason. I'd love to have a national coverage.

From what I understand of the Canadian free health care, it's not as great as it sounds. People there have to wait months to have surgeries they need, or come across the border to the US to have them (all expenses out of their pocket of course), also their health care doesn't support much if any mental health or disability care. Children (as well as adults) there are put on "wait lists" to get services if they are learning, physically, or mentally disabled and many of them never get services because by the time they reach the top of the wait list they are "too old" for services.

Just some food for thought, it only looks greener on the other side. Personally I will pay, or find a way to pay for health care, over having to see myself or someone I love put on a list to wait for care.

 

[uklad79]

Its 11% of earnings in the UK, 12% if you fall in the higher tax payers bracket. But paying for it aside, its especially nice that we can care for new comers to the country and those who make a career out of claiming benefits who have never contributed, while rationing care provision to the elderly who contributed since the National Insurance programme originated. Lets face it theyre old and will die soon anyway.

Oh and travel insurance is around $160 for a family of 4 going to the US for up to 28 days.

Just to add to this for people who think it sounds like a allot. The 11% is only on income over around $11,000 and the fund also pays unemployment benefit and state pension (yes we all get a small pension from the government).

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

Just to add to this for people who think it sounds like a allot. The 11% is only on income over around $11,000 and the fund also pays unemployment benefit and state pension (yes we all get a small pension from the government).

A bargain compared to 40% tax rates.

So the best option is dont work, have lots of kids, ideally suffer from a condition that prevents working but dosent interfere with you smoking, drinking or trips to the dealer or bookies.

You can always supplement this state income by getting your out of control kids to mug a few OAPs whos taxes funded the system that you live on. Whats the worse that can happen?? Youll be evicted from your house that the state pays for, and then being homeless youll qualify for rehousing because your homeless and you have rights.

 

[MouseMadness]

We do...but the wealthier people in the country believe that if you can't afford it yourself then you don't deserve it. And yes, the actual incident being discussed is a little suspicious...if she had thousands of dollars in medical bills I can't imagine she would have just walked out of the park...was there a mention of an ambulance? Even if she had required stitches (which means bleeding, and if Disney doesn't close down pools of water with blood in it then someone needs to call the Public Health Department and report them), that's not much money. Stitches don't cost thousands of dollars.

But stitches and an ct scan would :lol:

 

[sknydave]

You can build up thousands of dollars in medical bills with even the simplest of visits to the ER

 

[MouseMadness]

Yep... I had a daughter go in for 5 stitches. Between the hospital's bill (about $500) and the doctor's bill (about $200) we were pushing $1000 for it.

So add in any checking for internal injuries using ct/mri, it could get expensive QUICK!

 

[WDWTTA]

Why just her ???

Why not the raft before her or the ride after her ????

"Here you go honey - go play nicely at Disney and see if you can fall off something - you know how badly mummy needs a new sports car"

:ROFLOL:

Couldn't have said it better my self.