my 2 cents [MR] Frightening news

[Bryan Christian]

I just feel like I need to say a few things here.  I enjoy the SCA, and
various other activities that probably fall under the list of "Dangerous
activities."  There are several problems with this entire idea, however.
First, who gets to define what's dangerous?  It's hard enough to get the
insurance I have to pay for anything at this point, and if they are either
the ones making the rules or the ones interpreting them then I might as well
not even have it.

Second, this appears to be in regards to insurance provided by our jobs
among other things.  If I would like to think that if my employer wanted me
to have insurance so I could manage to afford health care and be at work, he
would not try to deprive me of my leisure activities because they are
"dangerous" and injuries during them are not covered.

Third, nearly any form of exercise can be construed as dangerous in some
manor.  Baseball, football, hockey, and soccer are all dangerous in one way
or another.  Does this mean we shouldn't be covered if we play these sports
in appropriate protective gear?  What about riding a bicycle through the
park with a helmet on, should we be covered then?  The answer in all these
cases is yes.  Horseback riding, as long as all normal safety precautions
are observed would also qualify, as would(in my mind) any of the forms of
SCA combat.  Unlike most sports, we provide a method of making sure people
are safe before allowing them to compete.  We have defined equipment safety
regulations that are quite high, inspections before using that equipment,
and when fighting a marshal must always be present.

The one thing I do want to point out here, in all these cases I have
mentioned APPROPRIATE PROTECTIVE GEAR.  I'm not sure I'd want to try to get
them to follow something like that so I don't care for the idea in general.
Still, if precautions are taken to reduce risk we should be able to do what
we enjoy.

Finally, one last thing to mention.  I'm only 20, and kids aren't something
I'm considering anytime soon.  That doesn't mean I wouldn't be conserned
about the effect of a law like this when I finally do however.  How many
times do kids do something that might considered dangerous?  How often do
they do this when no one is around to stop them?  What if the parent has
medical insurance covering the child, but cannot afford the expenses
otherwise?  If insurance can refuse to pay the expenses for something like
this and the parents cannot afford it what do they do then?

    I say this because I screwed up my shoulder in an injury some time ago,
however the damage didn't really show up until recently.  This injury was
sustained during a wrestling meet, which could obviously be considered
dangerous.  Does this mean that the >5000 in bills from the surgery to fix
the problem with my shoulder shouldn't have been covered?  If so I'd be
living with it still.  I'm a college student.  Although it was extremely
painful to me, I would have been forced to live with it until I could afford
it, which would have been at least three years.  Parents don't want to force
their kids to grow up in a bubble, but god knows I would have missed out on
all my childhood sport in the case of something like this.

I think I've said enough here.  Like I said, I find something like this
scary because I have enough problems with my insurance in the first place(as
do most of the people I know).  I don't want to live in a bubble fearing
that next time I have a problem is going to be when my insurance says "no,
that was dangerous" and refuses to pay.  Living my life safe enough so that
they are happy isn't something I even want to consider.

Melchior of Black Diamond

----- Original Message -----
From: "chris" <cschmac at i-america.net>
To: <atlantia at atlantia.sca.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 8:56 AM
Subject: Re: my 2 cents [MR] Frightening news


>
>     I enjoy horse back riding as well as other Dangerous activities. It
make
> sense to me if you enjoy something that puts your life endanger and
possibly
> could end your ability to provide for you or your family (if you have one)
> The individual has a responsibility not to do such an activity. Our
society
> (mundane) has given up good sense Thinking someone elce should pick up the
> bill for our fun.
>     Should insurance companies pick up the tab? That will be taken up by
the
> supreme court. From what i read it will be headed there the day this goes
> into effect and from what i know of the constitution it will be upheld.
>     Not to put a damper on things but this should be in the mind of  every
> person who participates on the field.
> What we do is dangerous. We can only limit the danger. We say our sport is
> Football like but that is rationalizing.
>  Life is all about  risk, you weigh the risk, then you live your life.
>
> In service
> Chris
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Oxford, David" <dmo at pqa.com>
> To: <atlantia at atlantia.sca.org>
> Sent: Monday, April 02, 2001 18:19
> Subject: RE: [MR] Frightening news
>
>
> > >> Regulations proposed by the Internal Revenue Service,
> > >> the Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration and
> > >> the Health Care Financing Administration could affect
> > >> people who enjoy horseback riding (and other forms of
> > >> recreation) by permitting health insurers to exclude
> > >> coverage for injuries resulting from riding and other
> > >> forms of "dangerous" recreation.
> >
> > If you want to check this out (and really enjoy reading federal
> regulations :),
> > take a peek at "Nondiscrimination in Health Coverage in the Group
Market;
> > Interim Final Rules and Proposed Rules [01/08/2001]" on the Department
of
> > Labor's Website at:
> >
> > http://www.dol.gov/dol/pwba/public/regs/fedreg/final/2001000106.htm
> >
> > If you want to comment on it, do it in writing and be extremely precise
in
> the
> > points you make.  Bulleted items are good.  Saying "I think this rule
> sucks"
> > doesn't carry any weight and isn't the point of a public comment period.
> You've
> > got to say WHY it sucks. :)
> >
> > Realistically, it's unlikely any of us who aren't lawyers dealing in
> federal
> > regulations can make meaningful commentary on this rule, but as a
citizen
> you
> > are certainly entitled to speak up.
> > ========================================================================
> >                    The Merry Rose Tavern at Cheapside
> >     List Info: http://merryrose.atlantia.sca.org/
> >   Submissions: Atlantia at atlantia.sca.org
> > Subscriptions:
http://seahorse.atlantia.sca.org/mailman/listinfo/atlantia
> >
>
> ========================================================================
>                    The Merry Rose Tavern at Cheapside
>     List Info: http://merryrose.atlantia.sca.org/
>   Submissions: Atlantia at atlantia.sca.org
> Subscriptions: http://seahorse.atlantia.sca.org/mailman/listinfo/atlantia