quilbea Posted August 14, 2010 #1 Share Posted August 14, 2010 The main difference in two policies we're looking at for our upcoming trip to Europe is that one covers up to 50K for medical expenses, and the other covers 100 k. We are in our 50's and are in good health, but I know it doesn't take much to run up a $50,000 bill at a hospital -- in the U.S, that is. But I've heard the medical costs in Europe are quite a bit lower. (We'll be in Italy most of the time). Any suggestions? (I'm not worried about the other issues such as pre-existing or cancellation, etc.) tia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klfrodo Posted August 14, 2010 #2 Share Posted August 14, 2010 $50K isn't even going to come close to air evac back to the States with on board nurse. $100K wouldn't even cover it. What's the cost differential? What's the cost benefit ratio for medical care at some local yokel hospital in Corsica vs state of the art facility in Rome and you or your wifes piece of mind? My personal preferance only but I'd be looking at $250K medical and $500K evac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilbea Posted August 14, 2010 Author #3 Share Posted August 14, 2010 I'm sorry - I must not have explained myself well. The 50 k I mentioned was just for medical care, separate from any medical transportation. The air evac. coverage was $500,000 in one, $1,000,000 in the other so I feel very safe with the air evac. portion in either. What I'm questioning is the cost of medical care in Europe -- if it is similar to the U.S., $50,000 may not go far., but I've heard it's substantially cheaper there. Of course, there's no predicting what emergencies may pop up, but I wonder what is generally considered sufficient coverage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill S Posted August 14, 2010 #4 Share Posted August 14, 2010 The question for me would be, "If I had $50k med coverage, and the bill was $55k, would I be glad that I saved a couple of hundred dollars on the insurance premium?" I would rather pay a few more bucks for the extra coverage and not have to worry whether I made a good decision if I needed medical care. But, that is just me. The odd thing about insurance is that you are betting that you will need it, and the insurance company is betting that you won't. The insurance company usually wins the bet, but if I win, I want it to cover the entire bet! ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare Keith1010 Posted August 14, 2010 #5 Share Posted August 14, 2010 We are also in our 50's and all I can say is we add on the addiontal $50K to bring it up to $100K per person. The cost for the additional coverage is small. I would definitely add it on . Keith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilbea Posted August 14, 2010 Author #6 Share Posted August 14, 2010 Thank you! I think the concensus is that the extra coverage woulc be well worth the extra cost if it turns out medical care is needed. Really, it's a small price to pay for peace of mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare Keith1010 Posted August 15, 2010 #7 Share Posted August 15, 2010 Thank you! I think the concensus is that the extra coverage woulc be well worth the extra cost if it turns out medical care is needed. Really, it's a small price to pay for peace of mind. You have this right. This is one of these things that you hope you will not need but if you do you'll be glad you paid the extra dollars for it. Keith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.