To hate the comment about "why dont you have life insurance"?

[partinor]

Yes if a partner dies when the family rely on their income, there will be a major impact on the finances of the household. And yes, life insurance would solve at least that impact.
BUT not everyone can get life insurance that covers everything. A LOT of people are born as children with illnesses that can have an impact on life expectancy, and so these will often not be covered by life insurance. With some conditions, it may be that you can not get any life insurance. Or the costs may be too high.
And when I was young and took out life insurance policies routinely excluded causes of death such as suicide or risky behaviour.
But easier to just blame the individuals.

Question to all the experts, brokers and nay-sayers et al.

Where exactly DOES an ex-smoking, mid-40s woman with severe MH problems (hospitalised within last 5 years) get LI?

I had it with work for 15 years - never thought much about it tbh, but I no longer work. Getting my financial house in order and went to get LI. Initial calculations came in at £300/month for £300k (fixed term). Except none would actually take me on.

If you can’t get it that’s different but if you don’t have it apathy or “it won’t happen to me” then yes that’s irresponsible parenting. Same with wills not having one is bad parenting.

My dh was uninsurable from the age of 22 onwards. We went through the list of companies from mind who allegedly provided specialist policies for people with mh problems, but none of them would touch him. Correctly as it turns out as he died at 52. I wish the people who assess risk for insurance also assessed risk for admission to hospital.

I am uninsurable and we can't afford it anyway. I do worry about it.

But most people who die without life insurance are just plain fucking irresponsible, and never bought it because "it won't happen to me". Well no, I disagree. When my Mum bought her house post retirement, she didn't take out life insurance because she doesn't need it. She has a pension, no dependants, and money in the bank that will pay for her funeral. Why does she need it?

I have a decreasing term policy that ends in 2021 when the mortgage is gone. I won't need it after that, as all the debts will be gone, ds is an adult, and dh will be retired with a good pension income. Buying a funeral plan is a different matter, but I don't see we will need life insurance once dh is retired. I see there is a case if you have a mortgage or kids to cover, but once the mortgage has been paid off or the kids have left home, do you really need it if you are sorted money wise?

We don't have life insurance either and I can't see how we need it. We have no DCs. I'm not financially dependant on DP as I'm the higher earner and could afford to live on my own, even if I worked part time in my current job. I have a good pension.

DP earns less so may struggle on his own, but if I died my pension would pay him out a lump sum that would pay off the mortgage and leave a bit left over, so he would manage OK.

When we retire (quite soon) we also won't have any life insurance as we won't need it either, DS is adult , we have savings which would cover funeral costs x 2, no mortgage and our own separate pensions so don't need it. It is mainly for if you have dependants and a mortgage and is especially important if one of you doesn't work. I don't think we will be buying a funeral plan but will make sure there is money to cover them.

We have 4 small kids, a mortgage and no life insurance. We don’t need it. Both of us can afford our lives single handedly. That’s always been important to me for my own security in case something happened to our marriage or DHs health but equally means I’m fine if the worst happened.

My DP has a genetic problem. He was expected to die as a toddler, then as a child, then in his twenties, etc. Medical knowledge keeps improving, so he may well make it to a decent age. But of course no insurer is going to touch him with a bargepole.
He has life insurance with a previous job, but now has none. Without his wage I would struggle as we are both low earners. But there is nothing I can do about it.
People don't seem to understand that life insurance people are trying to make money. They will happily insure those who they think are at a low risk of dying. Then those at a medium risk they may insure, but they will charge a lot of money. The last group they will simply say no.

@Auntie I'm not having a good but genuinely interested what your set up is - if your H died and you had 4 children to manage / care for (and potentially couldn't work) how would you pay your mortgage?

People don't seem to understand that life insurance people are trying to make money.

I disagree. Of course they do, it's like any other business, they're providing a product and make a profit on that. It comes down to risk and a desire for security / protection for partner / dependants.

Maybe they both earn plenty and have savings?

Could afford a nanny if necessary if they wanted to continue working, or live off the savings if they needed to stop working/step down to part time or a job without travel/long hours etc.

Obviously if you are genuinely unable to get life insurance then that’s very unfortunate but take the example of my DB and his wife: they have thre dc under the age of 11, big outgoings based on 2 FT salaries and no life insurance.

And they have asked us to look after their dc should anything happen to both of them. Yes, it’s a small risk but it’s also a real risk. I call that irresponsible.

What 'people' are asking you?
Seems a very bizarre thing to ask
My H died and no-one asked me if we had life insurance

This drives me insane. Every 5 mins I see an advert for life insurance. Even discounting my heart, they still won’t insure me without a sky high premium that we can’t afford. If anyone opens a decent, ethical insurance company, let me know!

I've never had a conversation with anybody about life insurance apart from mortgage brokers, where I realised quickly that they were more interested in earning commission than what we actually needed or was worth taking out.

The fact that some people can't get insurance, and that some others don't need it, and some can't afford it, is not a reason why they ones who can get it and do need it and can afford it it shouldn't have it.

In the thread about baby banks, it may have been insensitive to say "life insurance" in response to the woman who gave her DH dying five months into pregnancy as an unavoidable reason why someone might be destitute, but actually in the context of a forum thread that lots of people who could one day be in a similar position would be reading, it would have been wrong not to point out that the point she was making was wrong.

I'm not sure what proportion of households have no reason not to have insurance, but it seems plausible to me that it's at least half of all households that have children should have it.

There are free one year life covers as well for parents of under 5's.

DH and I made wills and got life insurance once we had DS. We already had a house with a mortgage on.

I don't understand parents who can afford either/both of these things and don't have them. Your DC should not potentially suffer because you don't believe in such things.

Partner - is it CF? I know most life insurance policies won't cover that.

My DH has been refused life insurance. We went through a broker and tried several options including a medical - he failed it. So for some people it is impossible to get life insurance. In fact he had a medical policy through work, which they converted into cash as Bupa wouldn't accept him with his health problems.

It's hard enough to get travel insurance but we just pay the higher premium and its fine.

It is frustrating. We have savings, but these have also taken a hit when DH has been in hospital for months.

I've been asked before if we have life insurance, I simply tell them thats a personal matter (aka Fuck Off).

I had insurance with my first mortgage, which I didn't need. Young and naive and thought (possibly correctly in the 1980's) that they wouldn't give me a mortgage if they couldn't make some money out of selling me insurance.

My next mortgage was ten years later, did not have insurance then because I knew I didn't need it and didn't have to take it.

Several years later, mortgage was paid off, and savings were high enough that I didn't need my permanent health insurance, so I cancelled that.

DD was born five years after that, don't need insurance because we have enough money.

By all means don't have insurance if you don't need it. And being too poor can be as valid a reason as being too rich. If you don't have a mortgage to pay off, and your lifestyle isn't much above benefits level to start with, it might well be valid not to have insurance. The benefits system is free (at point of use) insurance for everyone, not everyone needs more insurance than that.

To add to my above post - as my DH has been critically ill and has ongoing health problems, it does prompt the question from financially savvy relatives who wonder what provisions we have for the children if DH dies.

We have no real provisions, aside from savings, but like you OP there really isn't much more I can do about it.

Namechanged, I have a job. That can pay for our full time nanny, mortgage and living expenses. I wouldn’t quit my job. Things would be tighter but if it was death of DH that put me on my own responsible for the kids and our lives, id also have our investments to keep us secure and maybe take the pressure off by selling something and clearing our remaining mortgage.

It was always important to me to be able to afford all my kids single handed if needed so I kept working and took literally no mat leave each time. I’ve been lucky to be able to work from home remotely so no compromise in being around for the kids. That part is mostly just lucky but I would have kept working regardless.

My DP has a genetic problem. He was expected to die as a toddler, then as a child, then in his twenties, etc. Medical knowledge keeps improving, so he may well make it to a decent age. But of course no insurer is going to touch him with a bargepole.

This is a similar situation to one of my kids. They will never be able to get life insurance. They have never been able to get travel insurance as to get it we would need to pay several times over the cost of any trip for all of us just for the cost of travel insurance due to their issues, it’s prohibitive.

However, in this situation it’s fine, they CAN’T get it. Completely different situation to people who just can’t be arsed or have a ‘nothing will ever happen to me’ mentality, find it does then throw their arms up and take a ‘people are cunts for judging’ attitude. I sure as hell would judge in that situation.

Basically if you can’t get life insurance you need to organise yourself accordingly. For example if my child lives long enough to have children, one aspect (among so many others) would have to be whether they would be in a situation where there would be enough to be able to provide for kids in the event of their death taking into account there would be no LI. You can’t have kids knowing there would be nothing to provide for them if you died.

As for no one understanding that LI companies are businesses out to make money - I think everyone understands this. It’s really quite a fundamental concept.

Not everyone would benefit that much from Insurance - if you have a single income, get top up benefits and rent your property you would probably not notice a huge financial difference if you lost one parent.

I have no dependent and own my house outright - I have enough savings to cover my funeral so why do I need it. If I die before retirement age all my pensions pay out lump sums so my children will inherit a substantial amount of money anyway.

My Dad died at 42 when me and all my siblings were children and never had life insurance but unknown to us his employer paid out 10 years salary plus a pension for my Mum

You need to base it on all aspects of your life - not a blanket rule for everyone.