In Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Bishop, 132 Ga. App. 816 (209 S.E.2d 223) (1974), the court stated that the term "'medical care and treatment'" refers generally "to something done in the application of the curative arts, whether by drugs or other therapy, with the end in view of alleviating a pathological condition. Thus, surgery, in its extended sense, may constitute 'care and treatment' when a mere examination does not." Id. at 818 (2). This court went on to hold that when "the purpose of the two preoperative visits was for diagnostic and evaluation purposes only, with no treatment involved," the visits were not excluded under the plaintiff's insurance policy. Id. See also Beggs v. Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Co., 171 Ga. App. 204, 205-206 (2) (318 S.E.2d 836) (1984). In Georgia, the insurer bears the burden of showing that a fact situation falls within an exclusionary clause of an insurance policy. Bishop, supra, 132 Ga. App. at 817 (1). And when construction of a policy is required, exclusions must be construed against the insurer and in favor of the insured. Id.