It’s been several months since there was any major movement on the life insurance underwriting scene for those with type 2 diabetes, but a major company today shattered that trend by announcing that are willing to approve at preferred plus rates within certain criteria. This certainly falls into one of those news worthy things that I would love to share with the American Diabetes Association, but they’ve made it clear that sharing good news is selling. DLife and TuDiabetes should pick up on it through Twitter.
The bad news is that it isn’t going to be for everyone. The good news is that a company would underwrite this aggressively for anyone with diabetes. It’s simply unprecedented.
From their head underwriter I got this underwriting synopsis, “60+ yr old Type 2 Diabetic, duration 5 years or less. Excellent control as measured by the A1c, on oral med or diet treatment. Balance of medical history favorable and no associated complications. All other factors fit Super Preferred. Case approved Super Preferred.” And while one case doesn’t make a trend, we have had one case approved under this scenario and all indications are that this will be their stance for the foreseeable future.
Being the careful kind of guy that I am I asked for clarification. I asked for clarification on what is considered “excellent control”? Answer was 7.0 A1c or less. How long does that A1c have to be at that level to qualify for best rates? At least six months. If the client doesn’t qualify for super preferred but meets all other criteria, how is their rate class determined? If the diabetes falls within the age and control guidelines given, they would qualify for whatever rate class they would get in the absence of the diabetes.
I know all of those younger than 60 will be crying foul, but keep in mind that we have been very successful at getting younger clients better than standard approved rates provided the control is excellent and there aren’t other risk factors that would bump them higher. It gives me hope that better news may come soon for those under 60.
Bottom line. We need to take this for what it is, great news. Call a knowledgeable independent agent today.
May 4th, 2009
About three weeks ago I had written about an attempt to help the American Diabetes Association with their less than professional information concerning life insurance for those with diabetes. It remains my contention that if an advocacy group is not going to provide complete, accurate information on a subject that impacts their constituency, they should at least provide active links to other sources for that information.
I was roundly booed by Tom Cullinan who, without knowing what had transpired between myself and the ADA, decided that my email to the ADA was caustic. I received a response from Kendall Van Pool, Associate Director of Policy and Strategic Alliances. He wrote back, “I’m excited that you have written us and I’m hoping we have a chance to work through the issues of the web page. The page was written a while ago and I agree along with others on the site they are not up to date on the issues. We are currently doing a full web redesign and that puts myself and one other here in the position to review all of the insurance pages on the site. Because we do not have an insurance advocacy division at the ADA we put information on these pages that will help individuals become self advocates for coverage if they are having trouble. If you have suggestions please send them to me and we will most certainly entertain the changes.” Seems like a normal response to caustic comments?
So, admitting that the information on life insurance was out of date, he asked for input and asked me to direct that to a different department, which I did. I shared what the state of current diabetes underwriting is and how it remains anything but static (the ADA page had been the same for years). I suggested ways to make the information alive and current without promoting any particular company or agency.
After 3 weeks and no response I emailed Mr Van Pool this morning to find out what the status of our discussion was and received this response concerning the rebuilding of the ADA website, “Unfortunately the sites will be static information regardless. I’m exploring ways to ensure it gets updated more frequently, however the option of outsourcing the content is not possible”.
This leaves the person with diabetes still looking to more biased outside sources rather than their self professed advocate for information that is critical to their every day life. Well, I can’t say that I hadn’t been warned that the ADA seems to have its’ own agenda. And my mother did warn me that the world doesn’t revolve around me, so the next best thing is to blog and offer direction to websites that do offer helpful, up to date information on how those with type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes can get the best possible life insurance values. And continue to blog and update as the underwriting evolves.
Bottom line. I started to get a sense of what the ADA was worth to the diabetic community when they didn’t even answer my requests for information they might have on mortality statistics for juvenile diabetics. The point was further driven home when, in spite of the fact that they admitted it didn’t appear that I was trying to sell anything, they rather rudely black balled me from their forums where people were asking about how to get life insurance. I predict that in spite of the size of the ADA and their historical position as “the diabetes advocacy group” they will soon be left in their static, dusty place by new groups such as tuDiabetes and DLife.
April 14th, 2009
