Am I being unreasonable... to think life insurance might be pointless?

[WOBNIARM]

My partner suffers from mental health difficulties (exhibiting symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder and multiple personality disorder [now called dissociative identity disorder]) and physical health difficulties where they require the support of a wheelchair.
Unfortunately, despite repeatedly trying to get any diagnosis for the last three years my partner is without a diagnosis for any of these health problems as of yet, so I have to be there supporting them every step of the way.
Even though we are both unemployed, I have no issue supporting my partner with their difficulties with our joined Universal Credit income but recently I noticed within the banking app on my phone there is a new option for life insurance.

I'd just like to put a disclaimer here, I have no intention of killing off my partner.

So I looked into the life insurance just to get a bit of an understanding and this is what I found.

1. Guaranteed 60+ Life Insurance = No good to me, I'm not 60+.
2. Life Insurance = Pays out if I die or am diagnosed as terminally ill.
3. Life Insurance + Cancer, Heart Attack & Stroke = Pays out same as life insurance, but includes if I am diagnosed with cancer, a heart attack or a stroke, even if I recover. Naturally my brain goes towards option 3, it seems like a better option if I were to get life insurance at all as that'd still allow me 3/4 chances to continue to support my partner.

Having said that, am I being unreasonable to think that it might be pointless to get life insurance on myself when my partner would be unable to look after herself if I died or unable to support me if I needed her to?

If you had no money and no life cover and you died, your partner would be assessed for a care package from the local authority.
She wouldn't have to pay but if she gets PIP they can take into account any care component in the financial assessment. She also gets very little choice in the care.

Life cover to provide ongoing lifelong care would need to very high as it's very expensive.

As you are on benefits then she should be eligible for a funeral expenses payment towards the costs of a funeral.

www.turn2us.org.uk/Benefit-guides/Funeral-Payment/How-much-Funeral-Payment-will-I-get#guide-content

Worst case scenario your partner is not wrong in that there are still "pauper's funerals" or public health funerals as they I now known. These happen when there is no one to take care of the arrangements normally (ie no friends or family) but can also happen if the family don't have the money to pay for the funeral (or are unwilling to do so). They are very basic and any family don't have any say in the proceedings.

Your partner may also be eligible for a bereavement support payment if you die before you reach pension age.

Also you need to consider how a lump sum life insurance payment would impact your partner's benefit entitlement. As she would need to use the life insurance to live on if she exceeded the amount for benefits purposes until it was depleted so much that she was able to reclaim benefits - ie you could pay into a policy fit years that then means she has to pay for care and benefits stopped (plus all the passports benefits that come with benefit entitlement) until it's depleted and then she qualified again for care and benefits. In which case it's a waste of your money paying the premiums.

Worth looking into all the above before you take out life insurance.

@aspadeaspade

To be blunt, life assurance is only pointless if you're planning to end your own life (because the terms usually exclude payouts in that situation). For everyone else, if you have at least one dependent, it's worth taking out.

I have quite a substantial policy that is split between my family, so I know if I die first, they'll have enough cash to not worry about the bills and take some time to mourn me. At least, they better bloody well damn mourn me after I've been this considerate. I note it's a one-way thing - no one else has taken out a policy.

That's a myth. Life assurance policies do generally include death by suicide. What they do instead is exclude people from having life assurance at all if they've a history of suicidal thoughts/attempts/serious MH conditions. Some insurers accept you if you've had no suicidal thoughts in 2 years prior to starting the claim. They won't exclude suicide (I've asked!) probably because it's not always possible to tell for sure whether someone has accidentally or purposely ended their life.

Following on from a PP (that I can't find now), you may be able to access social housing if you are in unsuitable housing that requires adaptations that your landlord won't allow.

The process is request an OT assessment from local authority (adult social services). They will recommend adaptations. Speak to landlord. If they refuse them you can approach council to say your home is unsuitable as it needs adaptations.

Speak to shelter for more info about accessing social housing as your home is unsuitable. They can also advise on how care as well.

@WASHI

We’re looking into getting income protection cover rather than life insurance. The latter just seems like such a con with so many exclusions.

We have life and critical illness cover. We did have the income protection but it was rubbish. Might have just been the policy we had but it only paid out after something like 100 days unemployment by which time you're likely to be in another job. It doesn't cover all the bills as you'd expect the other person to still be able to make their contribution. It just wasn't as good as we thought in terms of protection and wasn't cheap either.

It's not true that you likely only break even on a life insurance pay out based on what you pay in. I'd have to pay 500 years of premiums to have spent the value of our life insurance pay out.