Family health insurance??

[goats]

Anyone got this, minefield to someone who has never had any health cover!
Looking to get the wife and kids covered.
Anyone any advice on decent companies and levels of cover would be great.

[Fine Lines]

Not sure if your in a trade union , but they offered one to me. Can cost a fortune depending on your health etc.

I do think this will become common place in the future and employers will start offering cover.

[Des Parrot]

Anyone got this, minefield to someone who has never had any health cover!
Looking to get the wife and kids covered.
Anyone any advice on decent companies and levels of cover would be great.

I've got one with work (which still costs a fortune in tax). My only advice would be take your time, shop around, read the small print & watch out for pre-existing conditions. I have had psoriasis for 50+ years and it came as a shock to find out that it's counted as a pre-existing condition for arthritis. Beware of caps & limits, particularly for out-patient treatments.

[JumpersforGoalposts]

There are essentially three types of plan:
- diagnosis and testing (i.e. doesn't cover treatment)
- outpatient plans (i.e. covers conditions where you can be treated without requiring a hospital stay)
- full benefits plans (i.e. covers everything including cost of a hospital stay)

Pre-existing conditions will be excluded usually on a "2 and 2" moratorium basis, i.e. any pre-existing condition diagnosed or treated in the 2 years before you took out the plan is not covered until you have been clear of that condition for 2 years.
As Des points out above this applies to related conditions.
If you are concerned about a complicated medical history then some insurers will provide a "medically underwritten" policy, i.e. they assess your pre-existing conditions and give you a list of conditions you will not be covered for - but that may be on an in perpetuity basis.


If you have the funds it may be cheaper to "self insure", i.e. park part of your savings as a fund if you need private treatment.

[goats]

There are essentially three types of plan:
- diagnosis and testing (i.e. doesn't cover treatment)
- outpatient plans (i.e. covers conditions where you can be treated without requiring a hospital stay)
- full benefits plans (i.e. covers everything including cost of a hospital stay)

Pre-existing conditions will be excluded usually on a "2 and 2" moratorium basis, i.e. any pre-existing condition diagnosed or treated in the 2 years before you took out the plan is not covered until you have been clear of that condition for 2 years.
As Des points out above this applies to related conditions.
If you are concerned about a complicated medical history then some insurers will provide a "medically underwritten" policy, i.e. they assess your pre-existing conditions and give you a list of conditions you will not be covered for - but that may be on an in perpetuity basis.


If you have the funds it may be cheaper to "self insure", i.e. park part of your savings as a fund if you need private treatment.

Thanks for that folks. I’ve never had any medical issues or hospital stays, but hitting mid 40’s so thinking sensible/getting old.
Coming in at about 100 a month for the wife and two kids. As much as the nhs is great and has been there for the smaller issues people have, it’s so underfunded and part chaos I think private like the USA is the way they want us to go.....

[Fine Lines]

That sounds a good deal for full cover.

As my brother in law who lives in America put it.... people spend more maintaining their cars than they do their body’s in the uk.

[goats]

Spoke to a few, like bupa, Aviva etc but ‘the healthcare specialists” aptly names seem to be best, basically shop around them all to give you the best cover to suit.

[Penarth Blues]

If you have the funds it may be cheaper to "self insure", i.e. park part of your savings as a fund if you need private treatment.

I'd argue that this is by far the most cost-effective way to deal with this issue if you are concerned. You already contribute to, and have, health cover (the NHS) and if you get into complex treatments I've heard some horror stories regarding getting compensated from your schemes - and they almost inevitably put you back into the NHS at this stage anyway.

You can still access BUPA, etc. privately, even if not insured through them, and this can cut out quite a bit of the initial waiting times and stress. Once diagnosed they can then refer you back into the NHS via your own NHS doctor if you need more extensive treatment.

In the end you can spend a fortune insuring yourself against something that may not happen and that you can get treatment for anyway. This is why putting your £100/month away instead is probably the most sensible option, using the same risk-based approach the Insurers would use.

[JumpersforGoalposts]

Thanks for that folks. I’ve never had any medical issues or hospital stays, but hitting mid 40’s so thinking sensible/getting old.
Coming in at about 100 a month for the wife and two kids. As much as the nhs is great and has been there for the smaller issues people have, it’s so underfunded and part chaos I think private like the USA is the way they want us to go.....

That sounds a good price, just check the NCD scale and any policy excess (just as with car insurance).
Bear in mind that the best medical treatment you can get is from the NHS. You are paying essentially for "queue jumping" and potentially better stay facilities if you have in-patient care in a private hospital.

[JumpersforGoalposts]

I'd argue that this is by far the most cost-effective way to deal with this issue if you are concerned. You already contribute to, and have, health cover (the NHS) and if you get into complex treatments I've heard some horror stories regarding getting compensated from your schemes - and they almost inevitably put you back into the NHS at this stage anyway.

You can still access BUPA, etc. privately, even if not insured through them, and this can cut out quite a bit of the initial waiting times and stress. Once diagnosed they can then refer you back into the NHS via your own NHS doctor if you need more extensive treatment.

In the end you can spend a fortune insuring yourself against something that may not happen and that you can get treatment for anyway. This is why putting your £100/month away instead is probably the most sensible option, using the same risk-based approach the Insurers would use.

Indeed. Many insurance customers don't notice that "chronic" conditions are not covered, only "acute" conditions. This can be a very delicate problem when complicated conditions persist or become something more serious (especially if the "C" word comes into it).
Having cover "withdrawn" in these circumstances is normal practice although you would expect it to be handled with some sensitivity.

[goats]

Indeed. Many insurance customers don't notice that "chronic" conditions are not covered, only "acute" conditions. This can be a very delicate problem when complicated conditions persist or become something more serious (especially if the "C" word comes into it).
Having cover "withdrawn" in these circumstances is normal practice although you would expect it to be handled with some sensitivity.

Surely, comp cover is for such things such as cancer? It’s the main thing that kills people after all....that’s what the insurance is for as opposed to a broken arm. Surely no one would ever take out private cover if it’s proved worthless when actually needed?

[JumpersforGoalposts]

Surely, comp cover is for such things such as cancer? It’s the main thing that kills people after all....that’s what the insurance is for as opposed to a broken arm. Surely no one would ever take out private cover if it’s proved worthless when actually needed?

As I said private health insurance ONLY covers acute conditions, not chronic. It is always VERY clear in the T&Cs albeit that many people may not understand it.
Some cancers will be deemed acute, but can become chronic. These are the difficult cases where an insurance co will withdraw cover.

[Eric the Half a Bee]

Says much for how the NHS has been devalued that private medical insurance is becoming considered more and more

[xsnaggle]

Says much for how the NHS has been devalued that private medical insurance is becoming considered more and more

I would question that it is being devalued. A big part of the funding problem is the rapid advance of medical science and of the machinary to help it. These things are getting more expensive evey time they get smaller, more portable, faster more efficient better, but the money to buy them isn't any greater. remember it was always supposed to be funded from the NI contributions the same as pensions but the costs of both have far outstripped that source of funding many many years ago.

and before anyone starts beating the political drum, I understand different opinions on blame but this is still the major problem whoever is in downing Street. If it costs too much it can't be afforded and then there is an outdcry about under-funding but the tap could run for ever and never keep up with the cost of technology.

[RichardM]

I'd argue that this is by far the most cost-effective way to deal with this issue if you are concerned. You already contribute to, and have, health cover (the NHS) and if you get into complex treatments I've heard some horror stories regarding getting compensated from your schemes - and they almost inevitably put you back into the NHS at this stage anyway.

You can still access BUPA, etc. privately, even if not insured through them, and this can cut out quite a bit of the initial waiting times and stress. Once diagnosed they can then refer you back into the NHS via your own NHS doctor if you need more extensive treatment.

In the end you can spend a fortune insuring yourself against something that may not happen and that you can get treatment for anyway. This is why putting your £100/month away instead is probably the most sensible option, using the same risk-based approach the Insurers would use.

Self insurance is the best option for dental and pet insurance a lot of the time.