Do you get travel insurance??

[gracett1]

Yes, candygirl27540.

[Barb Nahoumi]

Just snorkeling at the beaches has dangers. There are times of the year when there are plenty of Portugese Man-of-War jelly fish in Bermuda. I remember snorkling from the beach once years ago and had to avoid quite a few of them. Google "bermuda portuguese man of war" and see.

 

Jellyfish stings do hurt, and sometimes require medical attention. I can attest to that fact, having grown up near the ocean. Been stung numerous times. OOOWWWW!!!!!!

[gracett1]

Leisure traveler 223. It sounds like you have a good idea on traveling insurance for your matters. I don't like to lose anything. Why, heck, I get mad when I lose $20 at penny poker! :-). So, my hubby didn't travel for work, but when we retire in a few years, that insurance you have might be worth looking into. Thanks for your information.

[gracett1]

Yes, Barb. You are correct. In Honduras recently, we all had sand flea bites. We were ok, but imagine if someone was allergic to it. Why someone in our party has bad food allergies and cross contamination of shellfish and dairy handling ended her up in the medical clinic on board with an IV. Of course, she knew her challenges before hand on a cruise and didn't take the insurance. I think it just depends on what your peace of mind is with all this. I'm your typical "worry wart", so I take it.

[garycarla]

Trip Insurance can be a reasonable "bet" for some people, and not so much for others. Sadly, I believe most the emotional reasons and lack of understanding cloud the matter.

 

MISS THE SHIP - some people buy this because they do not want to miss the ship. Sadly, insurance can not prevent this from happening. It can recover some additional cost issues, maybe. But if your flight or other things do not get you there in time, all the insurance in the world can not recover the first day, or whatever.

 

HAVE TO CANCEL THE CRUISE - A reasonable concern with personal issues, like job, health, etc. Some policies have restrictions and people can not always file a claim for this part.

 

CAN NOT AFFORD TO LOSE $3000 -There is also some false logic here when people say they can not afford the $3,000. Guess what? Apparently they can since they bought the cruise. What they should be saying is they can not live with the fact that they paid for a cruise, but were unable to go. Two VERY DIFFERENT things. One sucks. The other is NOT a financial loss.

 

MEDICAL EVAC or EMERGENCY - Valid concern, especially as these costs can go very high. Not all policies cover this. Does yours? Also, you can buy that type of insurance on an annual basis, or just by itself.

Edited January 27, 2015 by garycarla

[gracett1]

Yes , NCLs does cover med a vac.

[GeezerCouple]

Trip Insurance can be a reasonable "bet" for some people, and not so much for others. Sadly, I believe most the emotional reasons and lack of understanding cloud the matter.

 

MISS THE SHIP - some people buy this because they do not want to miss the ship. Sadly, insurance can not prevent this from happening. It can recover some additional cost issues, maybe. But if your flight or other things do not get you there in time, all the insurance in the world can not recover the first day, or whatever.

 

HAVE TO CANCEL THE CRUISE - A reasonable concern with personal issues, like job, health, etc. Some policies have restrictions and people can not always file a claim for this part.

 

CAN NOT AFFORD TO LOSE $3000 -There is also some false logic here when people say they can not afford the $3,000. Guess what? Apparently they can since they bought the cruise. What they should be saying is they can not live with the fact that they paid for a cruise, but were unable to go. Two VERY DIFFERENT things. One sucks. The other is NOT a financial loss.

 

MEDICAL EVAC or EMERGENCY - Valid concern, especially as these costs can go very high. Not all policies cover this. Does yours? Also, you can buy that type of insurance on an annual basis, or just by itself.

 

Hi garycarla,

 

I "sort of" of agree with statements like yours about insurance to replace the basic cost of the trip, such as the $3,000 here. Or it could be $1,000 for some, or $18,000 for others...

 

Yes, obviously, they can "afford" the loss. They've already PAID (whatever the amount paid at the time of loss, be it 50% or 100%, etc.), and that money is gone.

(I'm not going to include *here* the issue of when someone can NOT really "afford" the trip, and puts it on a charge card, planning to pay the minimum amount for ages - that is a very different problem in several ways.)

 

In a way, it IS a "financial loss", because if they actually still want to take the missed trip (a reasonable situation for many), then they have to pay a second time, for that one trip.

(And chances are good that in the future, it will cost at least a bit more, although not necessarily.)

 

So in part, one could think of it as insurance against the possibility of paying approximately double to take that trip.

 

But the way we think about it (in addition to the above) is the peace of mind factor.

We are at a stage in our lives where we can afford to "pay twice", but it doesn't mean we'd want to :(

And we are also at the stage in our lives [see pen name!] where things start going wrong, unfortunately. So of course, we get coverage that waives the typical pre-existing condition exclusion.

 

Indeed, we got a very good "feel" for this, with our first "big" trip, a bit more than a year ago now.

This was to be the start of "that next phase of our lives, travel!" :)

[even though DH doesn't want to retire yet; at least he's agreed to take "real" vacations, and now he is totally hooked on cruising].

 

So when a last minute medical emergency meant that we had to cancel the entire trip, in the backs of our minds, we were glad that amidst all of the medical concerns - which got much worse before they finally got better, thank goodness - we did not need to add regret about the relatively large sum that was now "gone".

 

Others will definitely feel differently about this type of trade-off.

But for us, the experience made us realize how glad we were that we had the insurance.

 

What is interesting is that after buying the insurance for the first trip, but before the medical emergency, we started thinking that maybe in the future, we should just focus on the overseas medical coverage and medevac, etc.

But once that happened, we were so very glad it was one less thing to deal with.

 

I think one can also think about "if one can afford the travel, one can also afford the small percentage extra for the insurance" - thinking here only of the trip costs; medical care/medevac/etc. are totally different, and potentially catastrophic.

 

So it really is a choice, based upon one's own experiences and risk aversion level, etc.

Especially for those with a variety of underlying medical conditions, it can be real "peace of mind".

And from an actuarial perspective, for those with various underlying medical conditions, it's probably a "better deal" in terms of the actual "cost" of the coverage, given that - to date - travel insurance doesn't do any medical underwriting. If you are fit to travel the day you take out the insurance, you can get the insurance.

(This also means that the coverage is a "less good deal" for those who are far healthier. But they may still want that same "peace of mind".)

 

What is troublesome, in our opinion, here on CruiseCritics, is when some are criticized for their choice, to buy travel insurance or not.

As long as everyone understands what it covers (and that varies), and thinks through whether it is worth it to them, that is what should matter.

 

GeezerCouple

[gracett1]

You are right