Community Views on Life Insurance and Genetic Tests
The FSC undertook a survey of 1000 Australians in
The moratorium, which the FSC announced in October, is part of the proposed new Life Insurance Code of Practice and follows calls from geneticists and recommendations from the 2018 Parliamentary Joint Committee inquiry into the life insurance industry.
From
"Our consumer research shows many Australians are open to taking a genetic test to predict the likelihood of becoming ill in future, but also support the principle of setting insurance premiums individually based on the likelihood of making a claim," FSC Senior Policy Manager
"Just over 60 per cent of Australians are against subsidising life insurance premiums for people who are at higher risk of getting ill in the future based on an adverse genetic test result.
"Life insurers need to balance the interests of all Australians, and not just act in the interests of those who have had an adverse genetic test result. The moratorium is designed to help get this balance right."
Next week the FSC will hold consultations about the new Code with a range of stakeholders, including geneticists, mental health advocates, consumer groups, the Life Code Compliance Committee and the
"The life insurance industry wants to promote genetic inclusion. However, the moratorium cannot be open-ended, because the cost of helping customers who have had an adverse genetic test result falls to the other customers to pay for it. The experience of other countries shows that the cost in the short term is likely to be small but, with the science advancing so rapidly, no-one knows the long-term cost.
"Australian life insurance policies are for the very long term and can last for 40 or 50 years or more. The industry needs to have caps for the different types of life insurance and regular reviews to ensure the balance is right and the long-term costs are manageable for all customers.
"We believe the policy serves to balance the interests of Australian consumers with the interests of the genetics research community and the sustainability of the life insurance industry."
The research undertaken by Pollinate for the FSC found:
* Just over half of the community (51 percent) are in favour of setting insurance premiums based on the likelihood of making a claim in the future. For life insurance, this is based on a range of factors such as a person's age, gender and health history. Only one in five Australians (22 percent) oppose individually set premiums, and one in three are unsure.
* When asked about introducing an element of cross-subsidy, almost two thirds (61 percent) of Australian adults say they are not willing to pay any extra life insurance premiums at all to subsidise people who have had an adverse genetic test result. A small minority are prepared to pay a little extra (
* Almost two thirds of Australians (63 percent) would be prepared to take a genetic test that could tell if they have a higher chance of getting a serious disease in the future. Within this group, the overwhelming majority would take a test through the established medical system (for example, Medicare), whereas a few would prefer to pay
The moratorium is broadly based on European designs but tailored for the Australian market. The Australian cap of
NYSUT Partnership With Fair Trade Coffee Company Dean’s Beans to Benefit Disaster Relief Efforts
Advisor News
Annuity News
Health/Employee Benefits News
Life Insurance News