FOR many Malaysians, travel insurance is something extra, often bought at the last minute or skipped entirely, with the thought that “nothing bad will happen". But every year, we hear stories of Malaysians stuck overseas because of sickness, accidents or emergencies, leaving embassies and the government to step in as a last resort.
This raises a real question: should travel insurance be required for all Malaysians going abroad?
At first, this idea might feel intrusive. People value their freedom to travel and extra rules can feel like unnecessary bureaucracy. But travelling isn’t just a personal choice anymore.
When Malaysians — or anyone — get into serious trouble abroad without insurance, it can spill over into public resources, requiring government help, emergency rescue or financial aid. In other words, not having insurance can affect the whole country, not just the traveller.
The main argument for mandatory travel insurance is responsibility. Medical care abroad can be shockingly expensive.
A simple accident or sudden illness can cost tens of thousands of ringgit. Insurance doesn’t stop bad things from happening but it prevents them from becoming a disaster. Requiring at least basic coverage ensures travellers aren’t left relying on luck or public sympathy.
There’s also the international context. Many countries already demand proof of insurance before letting travellers in. For example, anyone going to Europe on a Schengen visa needs insurance. A domestic requirement would simply align Malaysia with global norms, especially given pandemics, natural disasters and political instability.
But there are valid concerns. Even “affordable” insurance costs can be a burden for lower-income travellers, migrant workers, students or people who cross borders often. A one-size-fits-all rule could punish the people it is meant to help, unless cheaper options are available.
Enforcing such a rule is another challenge. Should insurance be checked when buying tickets, renewing passports, or at immigration? How much coverage is enough?
Badly designed systems could make travel more complicated without really keeping anyone safe, encouraging people to just buy the cheapest plan to tick a box.
Trust is also important. If the public doesn’t understand why insurance is mandatory or how it works, they might not actually get protection when they need it. Then insurance becomes a formality instead of real security.
A better approach might be somewhere between forcing everyone and doing nothing. The government could require insurance only for long trips, high-risk destinations or student and work travel.
They could also collaborate with insurers to offer cheap, simple coverage that everyone can understand. Incentives, instead of penalties, could encourage more people to get protected.
The bottom line is Malaysians should be protected when travelling abroad. The real question is how to balance personal freedom with responsibility to others. Properly designed mandatory insurance could help but rushed or poorly thought-out rules might just become another hassle without real benefits.
In today’s unpredictable world, travelling without insurance is more than a personal gamble. Whether through a mandate or smarter reforms, Malaysia may need to rethink how it safeguards its citizens abroad before another crisis forces the issue.