Slashdot Mirror
Should the Gov't Pay For Injured Man's Wii?
An anonymous reader writes "Politicians in the Australian state of Victoria are currently locked in a debate about whether an injured man should be able to claim the cost of a Nintendo Wii for rehabilitation purposes under worker's compensation. The man's doctor apparently recommended he use the Wii Fit exercise device, but both insurance companies and the government itself have blocked the payment and have now ridiculed the idea as paying for video games. But with the Wii Fit increasingly being used for rehabilitation purposes internationally, does the man have a fair case?"
He should be careful what he wishes for, apparently there might be a risk of ending up like this women:
http://idle.slashdot.org/story/10/04/15/146236/Woman-Claims-Wii-Fit-Caused-Persistent-Sexual-Arousal-Syndrome
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
I'm not saying they should condone it, but a Wii is probably a lot cheaper than any other form of treatment or medication. Just saying.
Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
It's not medical equipment unless it's covered in ugly, pink "medical grade" plastic and exposed polished stainless steel tubes. Also, it must have an impossible-to-clean membrane keypad. And cost four thousand dollars, and can only be rented for one thousand dollars a month.
Then and only then should the government pay for his rehabilitation tool.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
Since the Doctor suggested the Wii Fit, then I have no problems with the idea of the Government pay for the Wii Fit. If this were in the US, then I would agree that the Insurance company pay for it.
HOWEVER!
Since the Wii can be used for more than just the physical fitness applications, the Wii itself should not be paid for.
-- Wiccan Army, 13th Airborne Division "We will not fly silently into the night"
He was doing it wrong.
Hey, it’s better than the $15000 a “officially accepted” device would cost, that would do the same job.
I say, it is completely irrelevant what the device was “supposed to be’. What counts is:
1. Did it help him?
2. Was it not pointlessly expensive?
And as it looks like that’s a yes, and a yes, I say: If you’d pay a “official” device, of course it should be paid. And you should be thankful that he didn’t take the $15000 device. ^^
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Because the man can do the same exercises without the Wii, without the game.
Wii Fit is like a cheap personal trainer/motivator. No competent doctor is going to recommend it as a full replacement for a rehabilitation therapist. But they may recommend it as healthy, daily exercise. The same thing can be accomplished by handing the man a pamphlet, except Wii Fit motivates better.
Yes, Wii Fit should be recommended to motivate patients. No, a government shouldn't pay for this "extra motivation".
Except he doesn't need to lose weight, but to perform rehabilitation exercises. Have you even read the title?
Dilbert RSS feed
So what? You don't have to score points, just perform the motion and ignore the "game".
Dilbert RSS feed
The doctor recommended that I cure my overweightness + bad knees with a elliptical machine (told me to quit running, it's bad for me). Insurance will not pay for the $3000 machine, nor will it pay for a gym membership.
Doctors recommend things that you should do on your own. Doctors prescribe things that are necessary. His doctor only recommended a Wii, he did not prescribe one.
Also stupid because the court case is gonna cost way more than the $300 a wii with wii fit would cost.
So did the Doctor modify this Wii with a sonic screwdriver, or is it just a stock game console?
Broke my hip on the ice this winter. When I was in rehab they got me up and forced me to play a stupid bowling game on the wii. I hate video games! They seem to think anything that motivates you to get up and be more active is a good thing. ( Oklahoma, USA)
You could probably get equivalent exercise by chasing the neighborhood kids from your lawn.
I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
reminds me of Roger Ebert's complaint that his insurance would pay $8000 for a bulky piece of crap machine with a keyboard to speak for him that sounded like a bad 60s Sci-fi robot but refused to pay $1000 for a macbook that could do the same thing much better.
The Insurance companies more than likely have a deal with the manufacturers of that bulky, ugly equipment so that they get a kickback on any purchases they support. Insurance companies are not about providing a useful service to their customers, they are about making as much money as possible while paying out the least amount possible.
"The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
Worker's comp is a form of insurance.
Typically, it also comes with the provision that you cannot sue your employer for negligence, so business gets an enormous perk, and workers get fixed up so they continue to be productive for themselves and their families. Anyway, only complete retard would say that it would be better to be able to sue a company for millions, than pay $300 for a Wii.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
You do realize you're typing this on the Internet, which came from ARPANET, which was a military project funded by the government, right?
This signature serves no purpose other than to help you see which posts were made by me.