Life insurance declined due to mental health issue 15 years ago?

mattyprice4004

[DELETED USER] said:

I hope you get your issue resolved. Please consider writing to you MP (free via Write To Them) about it, it needs a change in the law.

Why? Insurance is a risk-based product, and those without historical MH issues shouldn't subsidise those who have. 
I suffer with MH problems myself, and I don't think it's fair that everyone else should be picking up my tab. 

[Deleted User]

delete 123

csgohan4

[DELETED USER] said:

mattyprice4004 said:

[DELETED USER] said:

I hope you get your issue resolved. Please consider writing to you MP (free via Write To Them) about it, it needs a change in the law.

Why? Insurance is a risk-based product, and those without historical MH issues shouldn't subsidise those who have. 
I suffer with MH problems myself, and I don't think it's fair that everyone else should be picking up my tab. 

Because people need insurance. In some cases it's a legal requirement (car) and in others people can end up in very bad situations if they can't get it.

The op could be looking at losing their home and living the rest of their life in poverty, or even worse dying and their surviving family being in that position. All because they made the mistake of seeking treatment for a mental health problem 15 years ago.

Mental health is already a crisis, knowing that getting treatment could have life long consequences isn't going to help.

Thinking it was a mistake seeking help, is already a mistake already. If  they had not sought help at the time, they would be a in far worse position.

Insurance covers generally items which are not known at the time. Insurers are not obliged to cover everyone, it is a risk based system. If they covered everyone, it would not be a sustainable model for both insurer or those who pay their premiums. The same goes for legally required items such as car insurance. 

If you knew you had a breast lump, would you put it off for the sake of getting a piece of paper to insure you, while you make it more and more un-treatable?  

Weighty1

[DELETED USER] said:

mattyprice4004 said:

[DELETED USER] said:

I hope you get your issue resolved. Please consider writing to you MP (free via Write To Them) about it, it needs a change in the law.

Why? Insurance is a risk-based product, and those without historical MH issues shouldn't subsidise those who have. 
I suffer with MH problems myself, and I don't think it's fair that everyone else should be picking up my tab. 

Because people need insurance. In some cases it's a legal requirement (car) and in others people can end up in very bad situations if they can't get it.

The op could be looking at losing their home and living the rest of their life in poverty, or even worse dying and their surviving family being in that position. All because they made the mistake of seeking treatment for a mental health problem 15 years ago.

Mental health is already a crisis, knowing that getting treatment could have life long consequences isn't going to help.

I'm a type 1 diabetic.  I can't get critical illness cover or income protection cover.  It's just not available.  Unlucky for me.  Some people are insurable some aren't.  There are guaranteed acceptance plans on the market so there is a route to obtaining cover but possibly just not with a medically underwritten plan.  Life rolls these dice at you and it is what it is.

csgohan4

Weighty1 said:

[DELETED USER] said:

mattyprice4004 said:

[DELETED USER] said:

I hope you get your issue resolved. Please consider writing to you MP (free via Write To Them) about it, it needs a change in the law.

Why? Insurance is a risk-based product, and those without historical MH issues shouldn't subsidise those who have. 
I suffer with MH problems myself, and I don't think it's fair that everyone else should be picking up my tab. 

Because people need insurance. In some cases it's a legal requirement (car) and in others people can end up in very bad situations if they can't get it.

The op could be looking at losing their home and living the rest of their life in poverty, or even worse dying and their surviving family being in that position. All because they made the mistake of seeking treatment for a mental health problem 15 years ago.

Mental health is already a crisis, knowing that getting treatment could have life long consequences isn't going to help.

I'm a type 1 diabetic.  I can't get critical illness cover or income protection cover.  It's just not available.  Unlucky for me.  Some people are insurable some aren't.  There are guaranteed acceptance plans on the market so there is a route to obtaining cover but possibly just not with a medically underwritten plan.  Life rolls these dice at you and it is what it is.

unfortunately some people feel entitled to things in life without thinking about the bigger picture and why they can't have it or obtain it easily. 

[Deleted User]

delete 123

Weighty1

[DELETED USER] said:

csgohan4 said:

[DELETED USER] said:

mattyprice4004 said:

[DELETED USER] said:

I hope you get your issue resolved. Please consider writing to you MP (free via Write To Them) about it, it needs a change in the law.

Why? Insurance is a risk-based product, and those without historical MH issues shouldn't subsidise those who have. 
I suffer with MH problems myself, and I don't think it's fair that everyone else should be picking up my tab. 

Because people need insurance. In some cases it's a legal requirement (car) and in others people can end up in very bad situations if they can't get it.

The op could be looking at losing their home and living the rest of their life in poverty, or even worse dying and their surviving family being in that position. All because they made the mistake of seeking treatment for a mental health problem 15 years ago.

Mental health is already a crisis, knowing that getting treatment could have life long consequences isn't going to help.

Thinking it was a mistake seeking help, is already a mistake already. If  they had not sought help at the time, they would be a in far worse position.

Insurance covers generally items which are not known at the time. Insurers are not obliged to cover everyone, it is a risk based system. If they covered everyone, it would not be a sustainable model for both insurer or those who pay their premiums. The same goes for legally required items such as car insurance. 

If you knew you had a breast lump, would you put it off for the sake of getting a piece of paper to insure you, while you make it more and more un-treatable?  

No, because cancer doesn't exclude you from getting decent, affordable insurance for life.

You could make this bogus argument about people who have homes that get flooded. Too risky, no obligation, too bad. Yet there exist schemes to make sure they can get somewhat affordable cover, because the government recognises the importance of having it.

Cancer can absolutely prevent you from getting life insurance ever again, depending on the type of cancer and it's histology.

csgohan4

Weighty1 said:

[DELETED USER] said:

csgohan4 said:

[DELETED USER] said:

mattyprice4004 said:

[DELETED USER] said:

I hope you get your issue resolved. Please consider writing to you MP (free via Write To Them) about it, it needs a change in the law.

Why? Insurance is a risk-based product, and those without historical MH issues shouldn't subsidise those who have. 
I suffer with MH problems myself, and I don't think it's fair that everyone else should be picking up my tab. 

Because people need insurance. In some cases it's a legal requirement (car) and in others people can end up in very bad situations if they can't get it.

The op could be looking at losing their home and living the rest of their life in poverty, or even worse dying and their surviving family being in that position. All because they made the mistake of seeking treatment for a mental health problem 15 years ago.

Mental health is already a crisis, knowing that getting treatment could have life long consequences isn't going to help.

Thinking it was a mistake seeking help, is already a mistake already. If  they had not sought help at the time, they would be a in far worse position.

Insurance covers generally items which are not known at the time. Insurers are not obliged to cover everyone, it is a risk based system. If they covered everyone, it would not be a sustainable model for both insurer or those who pay their premiums. The same goes for legally required items such as car insurance. 

If you knew you had a breast lump, would you put it off for the sake of getting a piece of paper to insure you, while you make it more and more un-treatable?  

No, because cancer doesn't exclude you from getting decent, affordable insurance for life.

You could make this bogus argument about people who have homes that get flooded. Too risky, no obligation, too bad. Yet there exist schemes to make sure they can get somewhat affordable cover, because the government recognises the importance of having it.

Cancer can absolutely prevent you from getting life insurance ever again, depending on the type of cancer and it's histology.

As I mentioned before, I know someone who is 10 years post breast cancer, no spread and no insurer wants to touch them, 3 years ago they could get cover no problem and no excessive premium loading

It shows that insurers risk appetite changes and so it should to reflect the current climate. It is what it is. Don't like it, try and find another insurer, but you can't force them to take you