Old Age and Insurance - Page 2

Posted: 11 years ago
Originally posted by axeion



Ohh, hope it all got sorted out. That brings up another topic, however older we get.. Our parents still think we are too small to try dealing with their problems 😡


Yes it did get sorted out, and that's when I faced for the first time the specter of their eventual medical expenses.

Can't blame the parents for this though, a responsible offspring would've taken the onus and responsibility without being asked. I should've offered to take on their paperwork and investments, insurance etc. without being asked to do it. Why should they come to the point of telling me that they can't handle their own work. Not in keeping with their dignity and self-respect, is it - to be forced to ask for help.
Posted: 11 years ago
Originally posted by Chitrashi


Yes, that information is a bit dated. Also most of these companies are offering a coverage with higher premium and lower coverage, whereas it should be the opposite for the elderly.

For most people living on their pensions it is a choice between paying a high premium for an unforeseeable eventuality or meeting their own monthly expenses.

Well that comes back to the issue of how profitable it is for the Insurance Company, nahi? Why would someone make an investment in a sinking ship? Instead of regulating private companies into lowering their premiums, the govt should implement better healthcare benefits/measures. Maybe something like a collaboration of the employees and employers chipping in a part of their monthly wages towards insurance after retirement. TBH, forcing the companies to provide higher coverage/lower premium to new elderly policy holders doesn't make sense... though if these people have already been policy-holders with the company for a good time, then providing them with membership benefits and lower premiums works well. 

Yes, idealism sounds good... but reality is that we live in a capitalist world. ðŸ˜ƒ
Posted: 11 years ago
Yes it is a capitalist world, but denying healthcare is not the solution either. Perhaps the government ought to provide better schemes for the elderly.

The other thing could be that if there is a long-term policy holder, then they should get some extra benefits. These people have dutifully paid the premium for 30 odd years, why deny them coverage when they need it the most. Had they simply saved the money they paid by way of premium, they would've had a sizeable nest-egg in this time.

Thirdly hospitalization charges, tests and medical expenses for the elderly should be subsidized by the government to a certain extent. Maximum coverage offered in schemes for the elderly is only Rs 1.00 Lakh. That would barely cover the cost of one time hospitalization.

Not asking for a lot, most developing nations have welfare programs and schemes for the elderly. Only in India do we leave them helpless and destitute.

Another thing the reason most children abandon their parents is that they cannot bear the rising healthcare and medical expenses. If they knew that there was a chance of getting aid to meet those expenses, we would have fewer elderly forced on the streets.
Posted: 11 years ago
Yes, denying healthcare is not a solution, but you don't expect someone to do charity either.. do you? 

I agree, and I already mentioned it. But for that you have to be a long-term policy holder. Lot of people don't try to do that either. Another solution can be that your Life Insurance policy come with minimum health insurance coverage. Two advantages, no one's doing a charity and also you've been saving up through your premium. For those who don't want to go for a separate health insurance, you do have basic coverage.

Government can subsidize the cost for govt run hospitals or those in the public sector. How can you control something that you don't own or share a stake? For a completely privately-funded hospital it would be unfair, unless you grant them funds to compensate for some of the expenditure incurred. And most of the civil hospitals do run on very subsidized rates, but do have huge waiting lists.

I agree, but then again... we go back to Demand and Supply Principle. If elderly are provided with aids, shouldn't the lower strata of the economically society also be provided with a similar aid? 

ps- IF messes with my quotes always! Arghh.
Edited by axeion - 11 years ago
Posted: 11 years ago
I dont understand why we are discussing insurance premiums in India now- I thought that disease was America's unique one! Last year an ultra sound in India cost me Rs 450 (direct pay with no insurance). This year, after insurance "adjustments" etc., (the original bill was for $1045) I need to pay $525. My dad's medicines cost him more than his doctor's visits or his lab work. My in laws have their family doc from way back and he still drops in and chats with them, "checks them" and leaves paid by a cup of nice filter coffee. I know of doctors (also in their 70s and 80s) who do not charge their senior patients a Rupee. The only ones who make money are the pharmaceutical companies who vend all kinds of chemical cocktails called medicines in an array of colors. There are also many non profits that treat many patients for free and are very well run. My grandma who is 92 still "concocts" her own cough syrups and fever reducer with herbs from the Siddha system. Another friend of ours from UP makes his own Chyavanprash and other ayurvedic mixtures and not only keeps himself employed but also helps and supports the health of his friends and neighbors.
Posted: 11 years ago
i think the purpose of this episode was the lack of "care" faced by the seniors rather than their medical insurance status.
Posted: 11 years ago
Originally posted by blokes


i think the purpose of this episode was the lack of "care" faced by the seniors rather than their medical insurance status.


Yes, you are right. The episode wasn't about health insurance premiums, but Chitrashi bought up the issue bcoz she faced it. This is not an episode discussion thread, but a thread to discuss health insurance plans in India for seniors.

I also agree with ur previous post about many doctors still treating their old patients for free n all. But that doesn't happen often. Like my grandfather retired from a govt organization, and they have lifelong insurance. The doctors in their company run hospital have been working there since 60s and although grandchildren should be treated in OPD, they take a quick look at us when we fall sick on vacations. But it's more bcoz most of us were delivered by one or the other doctor in that hospital, or their kids went to school with our parents or they are neighbours and likes. It's more on a humanitarian ground. What about those who don't have such family doctors and have to go through regular OPDs? To be honest, we find 450 to be less bcoz we have that spending power. Think about those living on pension?
Posted: 11 years ago
And when you take about self-sustainment through home remedies, they work well for lot of common ailments... But with age, our bodies tend become more prone to serious ailments as well organ distinctions. Unless a person has always had a very healthy lifestyle, and been cautious... they are always susceptible to something more than they can handle on their own.
Posted: 11 years ago
The reason I brought up that topic is that a lot of people turn out their parents due to lack of means for taking care of the elderly.

With increasing life-spans and better healthcare available the average life span has increased. This is a problem not unique to a particular country. Nations all across the globe are facing this.

When we look at low-income groups, there the choice is between securing the future of the children or taking care of parents. Cost of living, education and healthcare are increasingly becoming more expensive year by year.

I got thinking about this issue when I faced a probable personal crisis. Not that we require any subsidies or help, but anyone would get tensed when a secured investment disappears. At that tie I started thinking of people who would not have invested in adequate healthcare.

On an average Indians have the lowest health insurance. They are covered for only 20% of the eventual expenses they might face. Most rely solely on the healthcare packages provided by their employers.

Rising cost of living, greater life-span and inadequate health cover - almost all destitute elders are victims of this scenario. Now if there was a system similar to the pension fund for taking care of the elderly, probably there wouldn't be so many abandoned parents.

Hoe remedies work when a person is healthy and active to begin with. The ailments faced by the elderly are such that they leave them bed-ridden and dependent on others. In such situations home-remedies do not work. At the last stages almost constant round-the-clock attendance is required and with our hectic lifestyles very few can afford that.
Posted: 11 years ago
Good... so you are capable of a serious discussion albeit by hiding your id.

Total aside - when all usernames here are anonymous anyway, why would someone need to create an alternate id, just to hide another fake name?

As a matter of fact more 65+ citizens lead a healthier lifestyle than the current lot of the 30 somethings. They've lived and worked in an era when there was less adulteration, less stress, lower pollution levels, healthier lifestyle. Just saying is all.

So ok, if I owned an insurance company, what would I do, couple of things immediately come to mind - firstly distinguish those who are taking a policy as an investment venture from those who are taking a policy for health cover.

The investment portfolio can take a hit, he's also not likely to be a long term investor. His portfolio is going to change on a regular basis.

Those who genuinely need health cover would be partly subsidized by the investor. Secondly stop denying a policy on frivolous grounds for eg.  a minor skip in ECG when even doctors admit that the test itself causes the heart-beats to fluctuate.

Remove the necessity for hospitalization in order to claim health insurance. Even cancer patients do not stay in hospitals for more than a night. Most often people check into hospitals for routine checkups only in order to claim the insurance. The largest benefit of this circus are the hospitals and doctors - not the agency or the patients.

Haven't given the issue so much thought from the angle you posed the question. In order to come up with a fool-proof setup I would require more in-depth study. I'm sure I can come up with a good solution if I set my mind to it. But what I have is a decent start IMHO.

Related Topics

No Related topics found

Topic Info

3 Participants 19 Replies 2762Views

Topic started by -Purva-

Last replied by -Purva-

loader
loader
up-open TOP