Insurance Issues as Secondary Stressors Following Flooding in Rural Australia—A Mixed Methods Study

John W. McKenzie, Jo M. Longman, Ross Bailie, Maddy Braddon, Geoffrey G. Morgan, Edward Jegasothy and James Bennett-Levy
Additional contact information
John W. McKenzie: University Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, 61 Uralba Street, Lismore, NSW 2480, Australia
Jo M. Longman: University Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, 61 Uralba Street, Lismore, NSW 2480, Australia
Ross Bailie: University Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, 61 Uralba Street, Lismore, NSW 2480, Australia
Maddy Braddon: University Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, 61 Uralba Street, Lismore, NSW 2480, Australia
Geoffrey G. Morgan: University Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, 61 Uralba Street, Lismore, NSW 2480, Australia
Edward Jegasothy: University Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, 61 Uralba Street, Lismore, NSW 2480, Australia
James Bennett-Levy: University Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, 61 Uralba Street, Lismore, NSW 2480, Australia

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 19, issue 11, 1-13

Abstract: Flood events can be dramatic and traumatic. People exposed to floods are liable to suffer from a variety of adverse mental health outcomes. The adverse effects of stressors during the recovery process (secondary stressors) can sometimes be just as severe as the initial trauma. Six months after extensive flooding in rural Australia, a survey of 2530 locals was conducted focusing on their flood experiences and mental health status. This mixed methods study analysed (a) quantitative data from 521 respondents (21% of total survey respondents) who had insurance coverage and whose household was inundated, 96 (18%) of whom reported an insurance dispute or denial; and (b) qualitative data on insurance-related topics in the survey’s open comments sections. The mental health outcomes were all significantly associated with the degree of flood inundation. The association was strong for probable PTSD and ongoing distress (Adjusted Odds Ratios (AORs) with 95% confidence intervals 2.67 (1.8–4.0) and 2.30 (1.6–3.3), respectively). The associations were less strong but still significant for anxiety and depression (AORs 1.79 (1.2–2.7) and 1.84 (1.2–2.9)). The secondary stressor of insurance dispute had stronger associations with ongoing distress and depression than the initial flood exposure (AORs 2.43 (1.5–3.9) and 2.34 (1.4–3.9), respectively). Insurance was frequently mentioned in the open comment sections of the survey. Most comments (78% of comments from all survey respondents) were negative, with common adverse trends including dispute/denial, large premium increases after a claim, inconsistencies in companies’ responses and delayed assessments preventing timely remediation.

Keywords: disaster recovery; secondary stressors; insurance dispute; mental health; flood; mixed methods (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/11/6383/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/11/6383/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:11:p:6383-:d:822977

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().