Is health insurance worthwhile?

[cimbom]

Hello,

Just a random question I've been thinking about lately. I guess it's more worthwhile for people with higher incomes for tax reasons but not sure if it's really value for money for us. My husband and I have a joint income of 80k and our hospital and extras cover is about $150/month. For this we have hospital cover with $250 excess and basic extras. The most we use is probably $500 worth of extras a year, probably less. I'm a bit superstitious with stuff like this and think that if I cancel it, I'll have a reason to use it and wish I hadn't. But an extra 1.5-2k a year is decent money.

Thoughts?

 

[Luv2Travel]

I only have it for tax reasons, if not for that, I wouldn't have it. In 12 years and many thousands of dollars later, I've never made a single claim. I think it's a waste if you're young and healthy. I'd rather put that money aside into a savings account and just pay for a private hospital stay if you ever needed it.

 

[Aaron Sice]

we have it.

i wouldn't be without it.

the wait for public medical here is worse than Denpasar.

i know...from experience.

 

[Coconutwheels]

G'day,

My 2 cents... sometimes I think it's too much to spend (about $2300/pa for my family), but when I compare it to say my car insurance ($900/pa), I don't think there is any reason not to have it. In fact I'd cut the comprehensive insurance on the car before the health insurance. Just my thoughts anyway.

Ben

 

[Propertunity]

...with stuff like this and think that if I cancel it, I'll have a reason to use it and wish I hadn't. But an extra 1.5-2k a year is decent money. Thoughts?

NO-ONE buys life insurance or car insurance, hoping to make a claim......think about it. why should health insurance be any different?

 

[Rob Williams]

NO-ONE buys life insurance or car insurance, hoping to make a claim......think about it. why should health insurance be any different?

It does seem to be treated differently, doesn't it. The same people who say they don't or don't want to have it wouldn't drive an uninsured car or leave their home uninsured. I'm not sure what the difference is, but there does seem to be a different attitude toward health cover with some people.

 

[Aaron_C]

Private, always. You can't put a price on your life/health.

 

[Jonril]

My wife keeps telling me how terrible private hospitals are compared to public... well she would, because she's biased and works in the public system (but did work in private clincs) Private Hospitals all about profits yada yada kind of stuff

In the end she sold me on not going for private cover as if there is something seriously wrong most cases your going to end up in public anyway as all the unprofitable specialist needs aren't covered by private clincs and you'll end up in the public system anyway.

Plus death lists work in your favour if you are realitively young and healthy. Probably not so well if you are frail and unhealthy. (Although my wife keeps doleing out the candy to the hypcondriacs anyway because the doctors are nuff nuffs that don't like listing to whinging patients, but that is another story altogether.)

tl;dr We don't have private cover because we are cheap sods, and maybe screwed if one or both of us has a major health problem and we fall through the cracks of the public health system.

 

[MsAli]

Yeh it's worthwhile if you need to call the ambulance. We had to call one last year and they left in 5 minutes and they sent a bill of $300 something...subsidised by the gov't and paid by the insurance. Though I don't use it enough to make it worthwhile interms of glasses etc.

 

[cimbom]

Thanks for your replies. I largely agree with what you're all saying.

At times, it does feel like a bit of a scam though. I currently take medication which costs $150 for a pack that lasts about 3.5 months. Before I signed up to our current insurer, I asked them if this particular medication was covered under their pharmaceutical coverage and was told that it was. I then signed up and tried to claim a few weeks later, only to be told that they don't in fact cover that medication. They gave me a one-off "goodwill" refund and that was it. I would feel a lot better about it if that was at least covered. It wasn't even full coverage - only something like $50 back each time. This kind of scheme-y behaviour is what I find annoying.

By the way, we don't have a car. If I did, I would get something cheap and only have third-party coverage in case I happened to crash into a Rolls Royce or something. We pay a little extra in rent to live somewhere where it's not needed. It means we can afford to travel instead

 

[dan c]

We have it for both tax and other reasons.

Mid 2009 I had a knee operation, which would have cost $16,000 if we weren't insured.

So we are ahead at the moment!

 

[Peter_Tersteeg]

I've had private health since the insentives were brought in about 15 years ago.

Outside of my regular dental checkups, I've never made a claim and those rebates are far less than what I've paid. My wife is also quite healthy, never had an accident.

Dispite this, life has thrown us one little curveball and as a result my wife has had several years of what might be called, 'elective' treatments. Certainly not something we ever thought we'd need, and something most people completely take for granted.

As a result I think we're well ahead on claims vs premiums.


As for Medicare covering most things, I tend to agree. Dispite all the grumbling, Australians have one of the best public health systems in the world. There's also a lot of things that Medicare won't cover, or will put you onto a waiting list for. Private health can shortcut this very easily.

 

[Rob Williams]

There's also a lot of things that Medicare won't cover, or will put you onto a waiting list for. Private health can shortcut this very easily.

It's hard to put a monetary value on that. Same with the ability to choose your own hospital and doctor/surgeon. There's more to the argument than just dollars and cents.

 

[Sylvester]

If it doesn't make sense tax wise, then consider these points:
- if you have a significant traumatic injury, you'll end up in public hospital.
- if you live in the country, you'll be more reliant on public hospitals, or if private you'll rely on a GP to change your analgesia (when he can schedule a visit to the hospital). You'll also have the same specialists treat you at either.
- public hospitals have higher staff patient ratios than private.
-

There's no reason people cannot self insure. That is, invest the money you'd pay to a health fund elsewhere (property shares whatever). I know several asset rich cash flow poor educated people who do this and are well ahead, in NPV terms. By self insuring, lifestyle choices you make to minimize health risks are rewarded. They are not with private health insurance. The premiums you pay are inflated to cover the higher lifestyle health risks of the majority.

 

[DEC]

Yeh it's worthwhile if you need to call the ambulance. We had to call one last year and they left in 5 minutes and they sent a bill of $300 something...subsidised by the gov't and paid by the insurance. Though I don't use it enough to make it worthwhile interms of glasses etc.

Free Ambulance in QLD

 

[marg4000]

If it doesn't make sense tax wise, then consider these points:
- if you have a significant traumatic injury, you'll end up in public hospital.
- if you live in the country, you'll be more reliant on public hospitals, or if private you'll rely on a GP to change your analgesia (when he can schedule a visit to the hospital). You'll also have the same specialists treat you at either.
- public hospitals have higher staff patient ratios than private.
.

All true.

In the case of SERIOUS accident, injury or illness you will probably receive quicker attention in the public system.

However, it is the "non urgent" cases that are the worry.

People waiting 4-5 years for hip or knee replacements
2-3 year waits to even get on the waiting list to see a specialist
etc

Hubby had a few gastric problems and the local GP wrote to the public hospital referring him there to see a gastroenterologist. In the meantime we had the problem treated privately.

FOUR YEARS later we finally heard from the public hospital - only to be asked if we still wanted to wait on the waiting list for an appointment which would then put us on the real waiting list to see a specialist.

Hubby wanted to send the letter back saying he had died waiting, but I would not let him - seemed to be tempting the fates.

We tore it up.

So yes, we have private insurance with a larger excess - a bit of an each way bet.
Marg

 

[lizzie]

We have private health - but only enough to cover us for what we need (ie, no baby or orthodontic type stuff).

I make sure I use as much as I can - massage, natural health etc - as hubby, myself and child are all horribly healthy ... although ... did have an incidence recently where hubby needed to have something checked that could have been pre-cancerous. Public waiting list was "over 12 months" (no timeframe other than over 12 months given) - got in private the next week.

I watched my hubby's aunt on the public knee replacement list - took her 3 years of bone grinding on bone agony before she got in. Worst part is, she needed both hip and knee done, but was only allowed to go on the waiting list for one at a time.

Compare that to my MIL who needed non-urgent angina surgery - if there is any such thing - in within the month.

I also look at, if we leave it until later in life to sign, when things do start to fail, it will cost us a ***** load more in the long term.

My older friend and her hubby both "self insure" - they are self funded retirees, and consider that if they need work done they'll sell some shares or an IP etc ... but when the time came that he needed back surgery, he put it off and put it off because they'd have to "cash in" some of the income generating assets.

 

[Aaron_C]

All this talk about 3-4 year waiting lists etc the problem is that with Health, you can never ever have enough of it. The limitations are imposed due to monetary reasons from a federal government point of view. I am sure the lefties would only be happy if people never had to wait for surgery but we all know that is impossible.

But also, especially for surgery, long waiting times are due to the lack of surgeons. No one seems to understand that the College of Surgeons (and their associated colleges) deliberately limit the number of doctors admitted as surgeons. Failure rates for popular disciplines like ophthalmology and dermatology are 60%! And the people who are failing are not slouches - they are people who have slugged it through 6 years of medical school and then studied for another 3-4 years and told they're not good enough! It's not always the government's fault.

 

[Crabnet]

I don't have private health care. The last time I needed non urgent care I got a quote from a surgeon after a referral from my GP and was operated on at a time convenient to me as a private public patient. It wasn't that expensive once I claimed a refund from Medicare.
So what I'm saying is there is an option to self insure if one is disciplined enough to bank what would otherwise be health fund payments.

 

[marg4000]

.
So what I'm saying is there is an option to self insure if one is disciplined enough to bank what would otherwise be health fund payments.

Absolutely correct.

Same argument for renting instead of buying a PPOR, works if you are disciplined enough to invest the difference between the rent and what you would pay in payments on a PPOR.

Sadly, most people don't have the discipline to build a fund then leave it alone and let it grow.

A bit like the future fund established to pay future superannuation obligations, now looking like a rather attractive pot of money.....
Marg