Daily Editors' Notes

Why the likely demise of LTC insurance isn't all bad

Share this article:
John O'Connor, editorial director, McKnight's Long-Term Care News
John O'Connor, editorial director, McKnight's Long-Term Care News

Two decades ago, private long-term care insurance was seen as a can't-miss option for funding future nursing home costs. But like many of the people who purchased policies back then, the product now finds itself in pretty bad shape.

Some analysts are wondering why this sensible-sounding funding alternative seems to be suffering a slow, painful death. You don't need to be an economist to understand the answer. But it helps if you can grasp simple economics.

For starters, many people felt they would never need private insurance. Moreover, many insurers underestimated how much the costs of providing future care would rise. So we now have a situation where MetLife and Prudential have departed the scene, while John Hancock, Genworth and several other remaining players are seeking hefty premium increases – some as high as 90%.

If private long-term care insurance will have an epitaph, it will likely be something like this: It was a good start.

Like working-class parents who raise doctors, lawyers or other professionals, private LTC insurance will likely be a catalyst for more successful insurance options.

Already, we are seeing possible progeny emerge. One leading candidate: hybrid policies that combine LTC insurance with annuities or life insurance. These policies require purchasers to contribute a specified sum for 10 years. The payoff is that policyholders can get long-term care payouts, or their heirs can reap a death benefit. Another desirable aspect is that these policies typically have less stringent medical underwriting restrictions. That's no small consideration for a person with a heart condition.

Longevity insurance is another newcomer. This allows people to kick in a relatively small amount when they retire -- and reap a much larger return two decades later. For those who expect to live well into their retirement years, this can be an attractive choice.

Various other insurance themes are also emerging, and this trend will almost certainly continue.

It's not so notable that a concept that seemed like a good idea at the time is struggling and may not survive. But it is worth noting that many of the people who developed this concept learned from their mistakes -- and came up with new options that are much more likely to flourish.

Think there might be a lesson here for policymakers grappling with the future of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security?
Share this article:
close

Next Article in Daily Editors' Notes

Daily Editors' Notes

McKnight's Daily Editor's Notes features commentary on the latest in long-term care news. Entries are written by Editorial Director John O'Connor on Monday and Friday; Staff Writer Tim Mullaney on Tuesday, Editor James M. Berklan on Wednesday and Senior Editor Elizabeth Newman on Thursday.

    ALL MCKNIGHT'S BLOGS

    More in Daily Editors' Notes

    Finally, a Medicaid funding plan that actually makes sense

    Finally, a Medicaid funding plan that actually makes ...

    When politicians talk about Medicaid funding and nursing homes these days, an unsettling theme often emerges: the need to spend less of the former on the latter.

    What are the scouts saying about your long-term care organization?

    What are the scouts saying about your long-term ...

    There is no draft in senior living, nor really a need for one. But what if its three most dominant players were to be sized up? How might the scouts ...

    Butler County should take the addicts

    Butler County should take the addicts

    It's not a secret most county nursing homes are hemorrhaging money. That's why I was intrigued by a Butler County (OH) proposal to allow heroin addicts to stay short-term in ...