Recently D1 & her husband decided to take out large 30+ year life insurance that required medical tests and questionnaires. Prior to taking out the insurance, both of them decided to do genetic testing (they are thinking about having kids and hence the insurance). Unfortunately my son-in-law had some negative results, and D1’s test came back with very favorable results.
D1 decided to go through the process first in preparation for her husband’s application. She was asked if she had depression, if she had see any medical specialists. She has neck pain sometimes, so she has seen a chiropractor a few times. They asked her extensive questions about it. They went through every specialist she had seen and any medical procedures she had. She had no choice but to disclose everything because they said when she passes away someday they have up to 3 years to investigate the cause of her death. Her insurance amount is big enough that it would be worthwhile for them to investigate (misrepresentation of her application would be a reason for them not to pay out).
D1’s insurance agent said her H’s rate may be higher due to his genetic test. It would not be the case if he had waited to do the test after he had gotten the insurance.
It appears it is better now not to have too many tests done or go see doctors prior to taking out life insurance. I took out few large life insurance policies when the kids were young and I don’t remember insurance companies asking those questions. I guess now with so many people doing genetic tests that they have a lot more information. I am posting the parents here to share this with their young adults.
D1 did get her insurance approved with favorable rate and they are waiting to see what her H’s rate is going to be like.
Basically the life insurance analogue to the pre-existing condition exclusions for individual medical insurance prior to the ACA. Insurance companies understandably want to avoid adverse selection.
It’s never going to be cheaper to get a policy than at their current ages. Depending on the size of the policy, addutional tests may be required. That was the case for DH when he got a big policy.
OTOH, I doubled my policy while pregnant with S2. I was 30. Eleven years later, I was totally uninsurable (and remain so) and very thankful we had purchased the policy back then. We still have it.
The insurance company didn’t ask for genetic tests, but once they are taken then the results need to be disclosed. Young adults should consider carefully before having too many tests taken prior to taking out life insurance.
D1 kiddingly said it is better not to go to doctors for anything.
Some family histories actually make genetic testing wise indeed. Some of the familial breast cancer gene mutations and some colon cancer genetic screening could be very important information.
My understanding is not every type of policy with every insurer disqualifies you for something you’ve been treated for. I think this is a case where you’ve got to read the fine print. A friend with heart issues was covered on death from a heart issue. Not an expensive policy, as things go.
It was medically unanticipated, per the primary. That made a big difference. And for a newer policy, one sometimes has to make it past a 2 year date from the policy signing, whether anything is covered or it goes through review.
Don’t give up too soon on that fine print and ask all the questions you need. There must be some insurance expert on CC who can explain.
Yes, maybe some insurance expert can explain. I also wonder if they are allowed to access your medical information after you passed away if you didn’t give them explicit consent.
Essentially, if it’s in your medical history / records, including the MIB (medical information bureau) and the various scripts checks, the underwriters will want to research information, request medical records, etc. That’s what they do. If you have voluntary tests that are negative, no problem. Once they’re positive, they’re positive and will be reflected in underwriting.
Medical underwriting for life insurance has evolved substantially over the years. People are living longer and many basic issues that would have resulted in rate ups are less of an issue today. In fact, many carriers will issue up to 1M without doing labs, exams, etc. (provided nothing shows up on the MIB and Scripts check). However, there is far more accessible record keeping / sharing and therefore carriers have access to far more information. If it exists, there’s a good chance they’ll find it.
Any death occurring within the first two years will be “investigated”. Lot of fraud out there. However the flip side is once you get past the contestability stage, not much they can do (unless they prove the insured knowingly lied on the application). Had a client insured for 25M (large wealth transfer case) a few yrs back. His business fortunes changed, couldn’t cope with it, and committed suicide 4 yrs after issue. Carrier paid full benefit. Would not have paid a penny if it happened 2 yrs earlier.
I’ve not heard of underwriters taking issue with genetic markers (that were voluntarily uncovered - not due to any medical prognosis) that may or may not lead to health risks. They will take family history into consideration.
Genetic testing in the absence of a specific medical justification is not covered by health insurance and with good reason. Testing everyone for everything isn’t medically cost effective.
@rickle1 - I am wondering if the SIL should/need to disclose his genetic test result? If he doesn’t, if he should become ill later on, would his insurance be challenged.
^ Shouldn’t be. If his medical records indicate he has a health issue then he’s stuck. But if they don’t he should be fine. If a doctor used that information to start treating him for something, that’s a different story.
Typically the medical questions on a life insurance application come in the form of have you ever been treated for or been diagnosed with X. They will likely ask if there have been other medical tests done. I don’t think a genetic tests falls in this category. There’s a difference between voluntarily getting a stress test which results in showing artery blockage ( a current medical condition that requires treatment and ongoing medical care) and a genetic test that results in findings that someone is predisposed of X.
I would answer the question honestly but very specifically. If it asks “Has a medical doctor prescribed or required a test…” then the answer is no. If it asks “Have you had any medical tests. that require follow up…” No.
If the questions are such that the answer is clearly YES, I still think he’ll be fine, provided they results don’t require medical attention. Just explain why they were taken and what the ongoing medical treatment (none) will be. Without knowing more information, hard to say if you’re in a grey area.
@rickle1 - that’s very helpful. The son-in-law’s test result showed he is more predisposed to certain illness. It was not requested by his doctor and no medical treatment is required.
^ should be fine. It would be different if the results led him to follow up with a physician, and the physician request certain tests, and the results indicated illness.
Sometimes these genetic tests are great because they can lead to certain lifestyle changes (exercise / diet) that will reduce the chances of the predisposition.
Same question… We are taking life insurance policies out on our kids before we have then go through a genetic test. Looking for a specific marker that won’t require any treatment just to know its there is important though. Can actually do self tests to find it per se. The unknown is the why to get the life insurance since we don’t think they would be insurable after the fact, according to what’s on these forum sites for the condition. 50 /50 chance they won’t have the genetic marker also…