Can an Everest climber get life insurance?

[Kayeby]

@Duhkecco

Just curious: Are you a serious mountain climber?

Nah I’m not any sort of climber - serious or other. I was just watching an Everest documentary last night, and my fiance and I are getting term life insurance, so I just started wondering about the two.

Thank you for the responses so far - they’ve been very interesting!

[Duhkecco]

@brazil84

Please quote and cite the formal underwriting guidelines you are relying on for this claim.

This information is not posted on public websites.

You’ll just have to take my word for it.

Or, go through the entire underwriting process, and come back with a $1,000,000 life insurance policy that you gives you coverage for climbing Mt. Everest.
Hey, I said it’s possible.

[brazil84]

@Duhkecco

This information is not posted on public websites.

You still could quote the relevant language and tell us what documents it comes from.

You’ll just have to take my word for it.

No offense, but I’m not going to do that. You claim to have consulted several “formal underwriting guidelines” and concluded that none of them permit underwriting a policy for somebody who climbs in the Himalayas. Even if those guidelines are not available online, I don’t see why you can’t quote and cite them.

While it’s certainly possible that a carrier might exclude such persons, it also seems possible to me that dying on Mount Everest is sufficiently uncommon that it’s not worth the bother.

[iwakura43]

@brazil84

You claim to have consulted several “formal underwriting guidelines” and concluded that none of them permit underwriting a policy for somebody who climbs in the Himalayas. Even if those guidelines are not available online, I don’t see why you can’t quote and cite them.

If he’s an employee of an insurance company and was examining his company’s internal guidelines, it would be unethical and risky for him to release any of that information–certainly if his employer found out he would be in trouble.

[Shagnasty]

@Duhkecco

You’ve got that backwards: On a group life policy with no underwriting, life insurance companies dictate that all of the employess must have the same amount, or the same multiple of income, even they don’t want it. This is how they spread the risk. Otherwise, those employees will the greatest risks (health, or otherwise) would be much more likely to ask for coverage (and greater amounts of it), and expose the insurance company to greater than anticipated risk.

If, however, you want to apply for additional coverage through the group plan, then you will have to provide additional evidence, just as you would if you were applying for an individual policy.

I have no idea what you are saying. I work for one of the biggest benefits administration companies in the world and work on this stuff every day. I get to see this for not only my own megacorp but also the plans for many other large companies that everyone has heard of.

I have two young daughters so life insurance is important to me. When I signed up, I could get anywhere from 1 - 6 times pay at my discretion with no additional evidence of anything. I signed up for all of it since it is cheap for a 34 year old even though I would be the insurance company’s worst nightmare if I applied individually. It is also portable so I can keep it for life if I keep paying the premiums.

If I decide to parachute drunk down to base camp at Mt. Everest and spend a few days having sex with AIDS patients while smoking Marlboros and injecting heroine before I decide to ascend in nothing but a T-shirt that would be fine for my life insurance because it is a group policy that is locked in.

[Duhkecco]

@brazil84

You claim to have consulted several “formal underwriting guidelines” and concluded that none of them permit underwriting a policy for somebody who climbs in the Himalayas.

One of them says (and I’m quoting exactly): Climbing in the Himalayas is uninsurable.
Another one says (in the “Climbing Mountain” section): Rating $5-10/1000 to decline depending on height and level of expertise required. Height over 20,000 ft. declined.
The third one says: Decline if oxygen-assisted.

While it’s certainly possible that a carrier might exclude such persons, it also seems possible to me that dying on Mount Everest is sufficiently uncommon that it’s not worth the bother.

These guidelines do not mention Everest.

[brazil84]

@iwakura43

If he’s an employee of an insurance company and was examining his company’s internal guidelines, it would be unethical and risky for him to release any of that information–certainly if his employer found out he would be in trouble.

The quote suggests that he was referring to the underwriting guidelines of multiple insurance companies – not just one. Also, if what you’re saying is true, he’s already acted unethically. In any event, if he has a good reason for not quoting and citing, I’d love to hear it from him.

[brazil84]

@Duhkecco

One of them says (and I’m quoting exactly): Climbing in the Himalayas is uninsurable.
Another one says (in the “Climbing Mountain” section): Rating $5-10/1000 to decline depending on height and level of expertise required. Height over 20,000 ft. declined.
The third one says: Decline if oxygen-assisted.These guidelines do not mention Everest.

Ok, I concede now. And thank you for enlightening me.

[Duhkecco]

@Shagnasty

When I signed up, I could get anywhere from 1 - 6 times pay at my discretion with no additional evidence of anything. I signed up for all of it since it is cheap for a 34 year old even though I would be the insurance company’s worst nightmare if I applied individually. It is also portable so I can keep it for life if I keep paying the premiums.

Didn’t you say that “employers often dictate that their insurance providers give the same insurance to all employees”? Are you an employee?

BTW, 6 times pay is considered insufficient life insurance for a 34-year old with two young daughters. Unless you have a lot of assets.

[Duhkecco]

Sorry, just to clarify: What I meant to get across in my last comment was that group insurance that is obtainable without underwriting is *usually * insufficient.

Also, if your employer is very large, then you can have more liberal, flexible group life insurance because the risk for any individual employee is proportionately less. But, I’ve never heard of the range that **Shagnasty ** has with his company. But, then, I am not a group insurance specialist and my experience with group insurance has been been with smallish companies.

[Shagnasty]

@Duhkecco

Didn’t you say that “employers often dictate that their insurance providers give the same insurance to all employees”? Are you an employee?

BTW, 6 times pay is considered insufficient life insurance for a 34-year old with two young daughters. Unless you have a lot of assets.

It is common for megacorps to get give all their employees 1 - 2 times pay for free because that is cheap and a nice perk. At the same time, any employee can opt for more at the group rate although it is usually broken down by age and sometimes by smoking status but no other factors are taken into account. 6 times pay seems to be the upper limit for most group life policies but I don’t know why that is the magic number.

I signed up for all of it and I know it is insufficient but both much of my family and my wife’s family are very wealthy so it isn’t like my young daughters would ever want for anything. I just counted on my fingers nine big risk factors I have and I seriously doubt that I could ever get private life insurance. High blood pressure and flying small planes is but two minor examples of disqualifying conditions for me.

[muldoonthief]

@Shagnasty

It is common for megacorps to get give all their employees 1 - 2 times pay for free because that is cheap and a nice perk. At the same time, any employee can opt for more at the group rate although it is usually broken down by age and sometimes by smoking status but no other factors are taken into account. 6 times pay seems to be the upper limit for most group life policies but I don’t know why that is the magic number.

Just as another data point though - the private insurance I’ve bought as a pretty good (but not perfect) risk has always been significantly cheaper than the additional group life offered by various employers.

[Cluricaun]

@Shagnasty

.If I decide to parachute drunk down to base camp at Mt. Everest and spend a few days having sex with AIDS patients while smoking Marlboros and injecting heroine before I decide to ascend in nothing but a T-shirt that would be fine for my life insurance because it is a group policy that is locked in.

Can I come with you? That’s one of those biggies on my bucket list and I’ve been having the damnedest time checking that one off.

[Paul_in_Qatar]

Because of a quirk in the tax law, anyone in the US can get life insurance.

Say you are 83 and going in for an experimental heart surgery. So you give State Farm a million bucks, they give you a $990,000 life insurance policy. If you die, you heirs get the cash. Since it is from an insurance payout, it is not taxed like inheritance. Bingo!

So for enough money, anyone can get insurance.

[Moirai]

I used to work for the world’s largest scuba diving certification agency, and we had one hell of a time picking company insurance due to the sheer number of active scuba divers and instructors we had on staff! Diving is inherently dangerous and plenty of companies don’t want to insure even recreational divers (even the straight medical insurance plans have SOME small life insurance component). Instructors have specific insurance for when they are teaching, of course. Minimum policy used to be $1 million for our instructors.

I can’t remember if my brother has life insurance (besides his military stuff), but he’s a recreational skydiver, a scuba instructor, and he’s been in multiple war zones in the last 5 years.

PS- EJ and I each have 20 times our combined annual earnings in life insurance coverage. We have two small children. I consider this the minimum amount of coverage I am comfortable with.