Life Insurance for mid-50s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have an advisor and he suggested getting term life back when we were mid 30s, and had young kids and a mortgage. However, he just suggested we do it, and didn't point us to any vendors. I chose a vendor on my own, so he didn't get any kickback from it, that's for sure.

20year term life if you're in mid-50s is going to be super high. The avg life expectancy in the US is 76 years, so there's a high chance the insurer may have to pay out before the term expires.

If you really need it, get 10 year term instead.

Counterpoint: there are some advantages to getting a longer term than you think you'll need. Things don't always work out the way you think they will. My in-laws just purchased a term life insurance policy in their mid-60s. They planned on being retired by now but FIL was laid off at 55, couldn't get rehired at anything close to the same pay, and is now self-employed earning around $40K - he'll need to work until his early-mid 70s. MIL could survive if he passed prematurely but at a significantly lower standard of living, so they got a term policy.

Also, you can't just plan on getting the shortest term and then buying a new policy if needed. Because coverage and pricing are based on your health, developing any serious medical conditions could make life insurance unavailable later on (or prohibitively expensive). I got a 30-year term at 38 despite the fact that I don't think I'll need it more than 20 years. If that's the case, I'll just drop it early. But I still have memories of seeing news stories following the 2008 crash of people who thought retirement was imminent yet ended up having to work a lot longer.

They were scammed.

Uh, no, they weren't scammed - they actually went to one of the online broker places where you speak to an advisor for all of 20 minutes for them to gather your health information and give you a quote. After that, it was all admin staff. They had already decided beforehand how much coverage they needed and for how long.

Apparently, no one here believes it but people need and buy life insurance well into their 60s.

Any reputable insurance company is going to charge incredibly high premiums for insuring someone in their 60s. It’s sounds like your parents are both in their 60s, so no young children in the picture. This is just to ensure “quality of life” for your MIL. They will be paying probably $6k a year for that policy at least, for a $500k policy. If they were willing to write him a policy, they have a decent idea of the likelihood of him dying in the next 20 years.

I agree the term life insurance just wrote him the appropriate policy; the scam part in someone making them think it was a good idea.

Depends -- are they int heir 60s already with no medical issues -- not even on BP meds? If that is the case it will be a lot cheaper. Someone like that would be expected to live more than the 20 years.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have an advisor and he suggested getting term life back when we were mid 30s, and had young kids and a mortgage. However, he just suggested we do it, and didn't point us to any vendors. I chose a vendor on my own, so he didn't get any kickback from it, that's for sure.

20year term life if you're in mid-50s is going to be super high. The avg life expectancy in the US is 76 years, so there's a high chance the insurer may have to pay out before the term expires.

If you really need it, get 10 year term instead.

Counterpoint: there are some advantages to getting a longer term than you think you'll need. Things don't always work out the way you think they will. My in-laws just purchased a term life insurance policy in their mid-60s. They planned on being retired by now but FIL was laid off at 55, couldn't get rehired at anything close to the same pay, and is now self-employed earning around $40K - he'll need to work until his early-mid 70s. MIL could survive if he passed prematurely but at a significantly lower standard of living, so they got a term policy.

Also, you can't just plan on getting the shortest term and then buying a new policy if needed. Because coverage and pricing are based on your health, developing any serious medical conditions could make life insurance unavailable later on (or prohibitively expensive). I got a 30-year term at 38 despite the fact that I don't think I'll need it more than 20 years. If that's the case, I'll just drop it early. But I still have memories of seeing news stories following the 2008 crash of people who thought retirement was imminent yet ended up having to work a lot longer.

They were scammed.

Uh, no, they weren't scammed - they actually went to one of the online broker places where you speak to an advisor for all of 20 minutes for them to gather your health information and give you a quote. After that, it was all admin staff. They had already decided beforehand how much coverage they needed and for how long.

Apparently, no one here believes it but people need and buy life insurance well into their 60s.

Any reputable insurance company is going to charge incredibly high premiums for insuring someone in their 60s. It’s sounds like your parents are both in their 60s, so no young children in the picture. This is just to ensure “quality of life” for your MIL. They will be paying probably $6k a year for that policy at least, for a $500k policy. If they were willing to write him a policy, they have a decent idea of the likelihood of him dying in the next 20 years.

I agree the term life insurance just wrote him the appropriate policy; the scam part in someone making them think it was a good idea.

Wrong on all counts.

First, it was a 10-year term, not a 20-year term. As I mentioned, this is just to cover them for another 8 years or so since FIL has to work longer than original anticipated. That means the insurance company is only insuring him to age 75, which is still below average life expectancy, and therefore the premiums are not outrageous. Second, they got a $250K policy, not $500K - they just needed something small to bridge the gap. They ended up paying around $105/month, nowhere near the prices you suggested.

It's insane that DCUM thinks that getting laid off earlier than anticipated and therefore being unable to save as much as anticipated (and having to work longer) is some outlandishly improbable scenario. And spending $100/month to ensure that, if FIL were to die prematurely, MIL could still afford to take some trips with her grandkids instead of simply subsisting is frivolous or the result of having been mentally "scammed?" I feel sorry for your families.

That is a phenomenal premium, who is your insurer as I want a new term life insurance in my 50s (new wife , new baby).

agree. 10 year / $250k term in your 50s for $100/mo... every single person should buy one of those. $12k to payout $250k? According to WHO, Global Health Observatory (2022), the probably of dying between the ages of 55-65 while living in the US is 9%. That means the premium should be twice that for an insurance company to break even, let alone make profit. So this policy really should be closer to $300/mo

Yeah, I'm sure you know better than the [checks notes] numerous actuaries employed by the insurance company.

[Anonymous]

we got 20 year term insurance in our early and 40s to take us through retirement. The idea was to replace income/ensure that the surviving spouse could pay off the house and continue to max retirement and pay for college. My rate is 100/mo for 1m; spouse is 170 mo/for 750k (older, male).