Big Ben needs helmet both on field and road
Home ? "> Columnists ? "> Lemmon, Russ ?
Article published Sunday, June 18, 2006
Big Ben needs helmet both on field and road
Every so often, a famous athlete becomes permanently linked to something that has nothing to do with sports.
Lou Gehrig and Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS).
Magic Johnson and HIV / AIDS.
Lance Armstrong and testicular cancer.
Last week, without warning, Ben Roethlisberger's name became associated with motorcycle helmets.
The Findlay native may be the youngest quarterback to win a Super Bowl ' he did that in February, leading the Pittsburgh Steelers to their fifth NFL title ' but years from now he may be better known for his role in making motorcycle helmets mandatory in Ohio and Pennsylvania, if not the entire country.
We'll call it Big Ben's Law.
Mr. Roethlisberger's motorcycle accident Monday in Pittsburgh reignited the debate over whether helmets should be mandatory. He wasn't wearing one and paid a physical price ' a broken jaw, a broken nose, broken teeth, and a flaplike cut on the back of his head. He spent seven hours in surgery.
As is the case with the debate over global warming (I challenge you to watch Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth, which is now playing in the Toledo area, and still say global warming is a myth), the debate over making helmets mandatory should be over.
And I'm not talking about the absurdity of motorcycle helmets being optional when those in cars are required to wear seat belts.
Once upon a time I sided with those who say it should be a matter of "choice." In my early 20s, I owned a motorcycle and often rode without a helmet.
Why have I done an about-face? Because health-care costs are spiraling out of control, and Mr. Roethlisberger's hospital bill is part of the problem.
Would he have sustained a broken jaw had he been wearing a helmet? How about a broken nose? Broken teeth? A flaplike cut on the back of his head?
I'd like to look at Mr. Roethlisberger's hospital bill and see how much he was charged for work done on his jaw, nose, and teeth, as well as the cut on the back of his head.
Then, I'd like to compare that bill to one he would have received had he been wearing a helmet. No doubt the latter would be a fraction of the price.
The situation applies to anyone involved in a motorcycle accident. If he has medical insurance through his employer, there likely is a cap for what he has to pay for a hospital stay ' and the rest is absorbed by others in the health-insurance universe.
Which, of course, results in higher insurance premiums.
Health insurance or car insurance, the same principles apply. That is, policyholders get it in the end.
Admittedly, the cost of health care has become a top-of-mind issue for me only in recent months. It all started with an article that said couples should plan on spending at least $200,000 on health care after they retire. (Yikes!) Closer to home, and much more immediate, the cost of health care is a major issue in the current labor negotiations between The Blade and its unions.
This wasn't the first motorcycle accident where wearing a helmet could have prevented thousands of dollars in medical expenses from being absorbed by others. And it won't be the last.
In today's society, where too many live paycheck to paycheck, the "choice" argument for helmets is being trumped by our pocketbooks.
Cheap Car
|
