to think that the main breadwinner in a family should have critical illness cover

[splendide]

DH and I are disagreeing on this! Would be useful to know what other couples do.

I think it depends on your circumstances. If you have significant savings and generous sick pay and pension it may not be necessary.

Yes and income protection too. It is expensive. We pay €250 per month for life insurance for me and DH and critical illness and Income protection for DH.
But I wouldn't be without it, not while I have young kids. If DH couldn't work we would rather struggle even though I do have a job my earning potential is not nearly as good as his.
I heard a financial advisor on the radio recently say that if he sells 4 critical illness policies, 1 person will claim in their policy.
But I do understand that sometimes it is prohibitively expensive.

I have about 6 months net salary in savings and a shit pension and poor sick provisions through work.

rosamund1 I know a mummies boy who had it set to pay out to his parents and would not change that even when he got married, saying ‘but you’re young and can work, my parents need it more.’

Oddly, the young married lady in my office has hers set to pay her mother on the grounds that she is a widow and her DH is a high earner. Would you call her a 'daddies girl' In such a sexist and sneary derogatory way ?

Income protection is better. You're screwed with critical illness if you can't work due to a non-critical illness

I think you might be right actually Flowerbed. I suppose the ideal is both but I think that might be too much for us.

Been going over this very stuff with my insurance broker today as we are in the process of moving. We currently have critical illness cover, but as our jobs have changed we are now changing to a more affordable plan. DH has a good plan with his work and would be paid for 12 months, so are taking out income protection deferred for 12 months, and taking income protection for self employed me. It covers more than critical illness and although doesn’t cover mortgage in lump sum, it covers monthly bills until you are able to work again. If that’s never it still covers you. Also taking the life protection so if one dies then the mortgage is still paid. So for us income protection is more suited than critical illness.

If you can afford it, I would. We both had it and we claimed when my dp became ill. It was well worth the premiums, even after paying them for ten years.

Depends. It’s really expensive. Find an ifa and get some quotes...

I saw an IFA today funnily enough. That’s what’s prompted my and DH’s disagreement

Aha! Dh is an IFA. We don’t have CI cover as we have other assets ... and it is ££££

Do you have other assets?

Not really.

About 300k equity in the house and about 6 months net salary savings.

We have it. For DH it's an essential. When his first wife died (very young and very sudden) her cover paid off the mortgage and paid a lump sum which allowed him to take 6 months off work until he and Ds were settled a bit. He was also able to change his job to a more suitable one (he worked nights and lots of working away) to one that was lower paid, but meant he could be around for DS.

If you can fund the first so many months of no income yourself, the income protection insurance is less expensive than it would otherwise be.

It worth checking the terms of your workplace pension too. Some have an element of critical illness or income protection. Mine offers a lump sum payment if you die whilst still employed so I haven’t bought separate life cover.

Just before we had dc3, we were offered this under dh's employee benefits plan. He turned it down year after year despite my protests. When dc3 was 4, he was diagnosed with cancer. He totally regretted his decision. He'll probably never be able to get it now. Get it while you can. God knows what's round the corner.

I have income protection and life cover.
I have quite a physically demanding occupation and it is occupation specific ie if I couldn't do my job (not any job) it would pay out.
As breadwinner (DH is SAHP) I think it's essential I have this cover.

We have it . £82 a month for an enhanced policy but we have a fairly large mortgage .

Income protection policies are notoriously shady for misleading terms and struggles to get them to pay out and is more expensive than CI

And it is expensive!

Depends on combination of so many other circumstances. I'm inclined to agree with Unlimited at bottom of P! (and Martyn Lewis of course). It is expensive. Obviously all insurance is a gamble - that's how insurance works. If you are one of the unlucky few who have / would have claimed then you'd say it's great. If you never claim it is an awful lot of money being paid out. It also doesn't cover so many of the things you might have to stop working for.

We pay around £60 per month for life, critical illness and income protection. I read that at least 1 in 4 people will claim on it so to me it's worth every penny.

We have income protection insurance on DH, which tops up what he gets through work (about 1/3 if his salary).

We got it after a friend who does the same job as DH and who is exactly the same age found out he had cancer.

It pays out after 3 months IIRC.

I used to work for a company that specialises in income protection insurance so I did know what I was looking for.

We pay €600 a year for DH. Worth every penny. You really don't know what's round the corner.

Income protection is better. You're screwed with critical illness if you can't work due to a non-critical illness

I agree. Critical illness is very expensive. You should both have income protection and life insurance.

If 1 in 4 claim it, it must be for tiny sums as otherwise insurance companies go bust. £50 a month is £600 a year, so £24,000 over 40 years. Less 20% profit is £19,200 income per policyholder.
Assuming a £150k payout is 1 in 8 get paid out.