While this is true in specific, I’d like to extend it to all insurance products. Each person’s situation will be different and may benefit from different types of life insurance. No specific type will be good for everyone. To believe so is simplistic.
I can’t speak about the OP, but I need and want life insurance because my wife and I have made the choice that she’ll be a stay-at-home mom for our kids. This is better for them, we think, but if I die before she re-enters the workforce, she’ll need some financial help. And if we both due, my stepdaughter gets the kids, and that’ll be a burden on her which a life insurance payoff will all help with. It’s all about providing for the kids.
I am single with no kids and I have a very tiny policy through work because it is dirt cheap, pennies per paycheck, requires effort to opt out of, and would spare my family having to spend money on my funeral. Since my parents are well-off and I don’t have children or an SO, my younger brother is the beneficiary of the life insurance and my pension should I kick the bucket.
While this is certainly true, I would second the initial comment that for the vast majority of folks considering life insurance buying a term policy to cover the length of time that they have others depending on their earning power should be the default position. Then invest the premium difference between that and a whole life policy with the same death benefit - you will almost certainly end up better off.
Whole live, universal life, indexed universal life, etc should all be considered niche products and the purchaser should have a very good explanation for why they are choosing that over buying term and investing the difference. Especially with the estate tax exemption so high now.
IME, the vast majority of the time the only party that truly benefits from whole life policies is the agent earning the commission.
To answer the OP, the only reason you would want life insurance is if your death would cause financial hardship to those you love. For me that meant a small policy when I got married (my wife hadn’t finished her residency) and a much larger policy for me and her when we had our first (and second) child.
To be honest, we don’t have enough information to make any sort of judgement. Do you have kids, and if so, how old are they? How old are you and your wife? What debts do you have and do you wish that they be retired after you pass away? What is your income?
You say your wife can work… but is she going to be able to pull in enough to keep her in the lifestyle to which she’s become accustomed? You say you have a nest egg… is it your plan for your wife (or yourself) to spend this down, leaving one of you with nothing to retire on? If you have kids, you likely have college plans… but if you lose your income, can your wife provide for these plans?
Your life has a value, which can be readily calculated at many websites like this one. Assuming you make $50k/year, have 20 years to retire, and have $500k in assets… you still need $550k+ in life insurance to make up for your loss of income over the next 20 years and this assumes that your spouse is never going to retire as she must spend down your assets. And it also assumes that you’ll have a quick, clean death - what happens if you spend down your nest egg because you spend 2 years dying from cancer and can’t work?
I can tell you what happens - poverty and bankruptcy.
Is this what you want for your wife? Is it what she wants for you? If so, then you’re making the right choice for you. If that isn’t what you want, then you need to talk to a life insurance agent ASAP.
Yes and no, actually. Yeah, it’s kinda dumb to get a life insurance policy for a baby - on the other hand, those tend to be quite cheap, and I believe are whole life versus term, so in theory Junior could have that policy in place at dirt-cheap prices for his entire life. An uncle of mine was an insurance broker, and gave me (or my parents, for me) a fully-paid policy at birth, face value of 1,000 dollars. No clue what the premium was, probably a couple hundred. It’s now worth about 1,500 dollars (55 years later).
Are these good investments? Probably not at all (that policy is only worth about 8 times its purchase price after 55 years). But it’s not totally wacked out.
Parents also get solicitations for whole life policies when their kids go to college - my husband and I both have 10,000 dollar policies purchased by our parents, 35 years ago. Our premiums are quite affordable (120ish a year) and the policies have some cash value we could borrow against.
Re the OP: How old are you? Do you have sufficient assets to pay off the mortgage if one of you dies? Are you considering having children at some point? Or any other change that would make life insurance more of a necessity for you? What’s your current health like? Would your wife be able to afford the mortgage on a single income?
All these factor into whether life insurance might be worth getting now. Among other things, insurance gets more expensive (and harder to get) as you age and possibly develop health problems. Having a level-term policy in place now would offer some protection.
All that said - you know your situation better than we do, and your own savings might well be sufficient.
My condolences, dflower. I do know what you’re going through, and it’s a rough hand you’ve been dealt. I, too, offer hugs if they help.
With respect to the OP: My husband left a small life insurance policy when he died. I was so grateful for that, because it gave me breathing room and enabled me to transition into my current life. As Manda JO pointed out, the last thing you want to worry about when your spouse passes is whether or not you may have to move, too.
You can’t assume there will be another partner, and the economy can have its way with you. The last 8 years have taught us that needing to sell a home may not necessarily occur at a time when the market is favorable. And there may be other reasons to sell a home besides financial need: It may be too much for one person to manage, for example.
Ironically in my case, my husband and I had already elected to increase his term life insurance policy substantially as the open enrollment period at his work was in process when he died. The new policy didn’t go into effect until January, however, and he died in October. So it goes. What he left was more than enough.
This. Wife and I got married ~10 yrs ago, and took out a policy on each other. No kids to worry about, but neither one of us alone can make the mortgage payment indefinitely without tapping into our retirement nest egg, which is for…retirement. The life insurance policies are sized so that if one of us dies, the other receives a payout that will be enough to pay off the house. The survivor may choose to relocate or remarry instead of using the funds to pay off the mortgage, but in either of these cases the payout will buy them time; they don’t have to scramble and move/marry just a month or two after losing their spouse.
Which is another great reason to, as a default, prefer term insurance. Most of these large future expenditures are fixed in duration - mortgages, college education for children. Buying insurance to cover the duration for which you expect to make payments is a nice match for the risk. Once you pay off the house and the kids graduate college and are out on their own you are way less exposed.
It also helps that if you are relatively young and healthy, 20-year term life is extremely cheap.
Whole life insurance can be seen as an investment plan of some sort. But generally you would be better off on just buying term life insurance that you need and invest the premium difference on your own.
For the life insurance component, it shouldn’t be a lottery type event for the beneficiaries. If it is, then you probably are buying too much life insurance.
In my case, I am the sole earner for my family. If I were to suddenly die, my spouse and children would need enough money to help them continue our lifestyle without me. A good rule of thumb is a certain number of years of my annual after tax earnings, before a substitute could be found (i.e. wife is able to get back in the work force, children get out of college, etc.)
I also have a much smaller policy on my wife. If she were to pass, I would need to hire a nanny to help take of our smaller children for a few years.
If the people around you don’t depend upon you and your income, then yes, you don’t really need substantial life insurance.
We didn’t think $1700.00 each to advance pay our cremations was cheap.
Until she’s seriously injured in the same accident that kills you. Insurance is for the unforeseen.
One caveat to this … a small whole-life or universal-life policy, purchased when you’re young, is a good complement to a level-term policy. Because, if you live until your term life insurance expires, you’re often in worse health than you were when you originally bought the policy. At the very least, you’re 20 years (or however many years) older, and the actuarial tables are going to take that into account, with significant impact to the cost of coverage.
Many people don’t realize that once the term life expires, that same amount of coverage, even using term, is MUCH higher – because you’re older. Life insurance costs go up for each year you age. Not to mention the possibility of contracting a disease or condition that can increase your cost, or even make you completely uninsurable.
Some term policies have a conversion rider on them, meaning you can convert them to whole-life insurance at any point before they expire. Whole life costs MUCH more than term, but it also never goes up – the price is fixed forever based on the age at which you buy it.
So, having a small whole-life policy in addition to a larger term policy can be a good idea. It will cover or help defray your funeral expenses (which, depending on where you live, can be several thousand dollars) for your loved ones. And if you purchase it at an early age, it’s not terribly expensive – unlike term can be as you get older.
Others have touched on the issue of paying the mortgage.
The bank may require some sort of life insurance to issue a mortgage. If so, you will likely get MUCH better coverage for a cheaper rate by buying a term life policy from a broker rather than signing up for whatever mortgage life insurance the bank is peddling.
Thank you zweisamkeit and Aspenglow for the hugs. 
I am always happy to get hugs. That is why I married my husband, he was the most hugable man in the world.
Some life insurance offers are just terrible scams, so you have to be careful what you should get for your situation. Getting a policy just to have one that will only pay for burial costs is really a cheap kind of useless policy. I mean, there are people who are poor who die and they don’t leave them out on the road, they are still taken care of. What you really want life insurance for, assuming you don’t have children, is to provide for a spouse.
You don’t know how much your life is going to change if your spouse dies. You also might not be employed at that time and that insurance money would then be badly needed. You might have to relocate where you didn’t plan on doing so, and while nothing can replace a spouse that died, money can help make things easier to still enjoy life and live how you both intended too live.
However, if you now have enough wealth that life insurance isn’t going to change the situation at all for the survivor(s), then you don’t need life insurance.
But do your research and read trusted sources before getting any policy.
This is exactly why I have a term policy for my child(ren). It’s something like $15 or $20 / yr for a 10k policy, because the last damn thing I want to worry about if the unforseen happens is how I’m going to pay for the funeral.
Didn’t get ANY advertising here. (damn). At the time kids are born, I was eligible for additional life insurance without extra medical checks, but I missed the window.