Insurance coverage covering drug use in a world where it is legal seems like it would clearly exist and many would take advantage of it. And I don't see why climbers would be any more or less likely to be covered than recreational drug users. Even if there was a statistical difference, that's a practical concern not an ethical one.
Search and rescue is just one element of saving somebody who has hurt themselves climbing or base jumping. If I understand the policy GP described correctly, if the participant were poor enough, their physical therapy might be covered. Certainly surgery would be.
Differences between how we treat adrenaline junkies and drug users today are really just details. The broader moral question remains: Does a society that has committed to providing medical assistance to those who cannot afford it not tend towards limiting behaviors that tend to cause unusually high medical bills?
Search and rescue is just one element of saving somebody who has hurt themselves climbing or base jumping. If I understand the policy GP described correctly, if the participant were poor enough, their physical therapy might be covered. Certainly surgery would be.
Differences between how we treat adrenaline junkies and drug users today are really just details. The broader moral question remains: Does a society that has committed to providing medical assistance to those who cannot afford it not tend towards limiting behaviors that tend to cause unusually high medical bills?