-- from above --

4) they do it with others who will voluntarily without coercion perform the rescue (eg: within the purview of a climbing association/club who have suitably trained/qualified people ready to perform any rescue should the need arise),
5) they do it with others who have collectively decided to cover the rescue/treatment either directly or through insurance (eg: a club/association that agrees to cover the cost of any rescue by the emergency rescue services).

But just how far would I go with this concept?
Well, I can't think of many cases where for adults deliberately undertaking a risky behaviour for their own benefit that the general concept of being personally responsible (ie: pay the cost) for your actions shouldn't apply.
However, I believe kids should be free to take reasonable risks and that the community (eg: government) should collectively cover it. Kids should be allowed to take risks since it is part of learning how to identify and manage risk, mastering how to operate under stress and fosters an ability to control emotions and fears. Also in the case of group high risk activity (eg: contract team sports) it's part of learning to be part of a team and respecting others. Basically it's an essential part of growing up. eg: climbing trees, jumping of cliffs into water, playing rugby.

To JP: The chief medical adviser to US President Joe Biden, Anthony Fauci, said recently: “When you look at the pace of the infections now, things will get worse as we go into the depth of the winter. And with Omicron breathing down our back, things could get really bad, particularly for the unvaccinated.”

So you want things to get really bad? Why? It is stupid, uncaring thinking.