Wednesday, September 2, 2009

Long Term Care in New York Times

"My friend M. — you’ll understand in a moment why she’s terrified of my using her name — had to make a searing decision a year ago. She was married to a sweet, gentle man whom she loved, but who had become increasingly absent-minded. Finally, he was diagnosed with early-onset dementia.
The disease is degenerative, and he will become steadily less able to care for himself. At some point, as his medical needs multiply, he will probably need to be institutionalized.
The hospital arranged a conference call with a social worker, who outlined how the dementia and its financial toll on the family would progress, and then added, out of the blue: “Maybe you should divorce.”
“I was blown away,” M. told me. But, she said, the hospital staff members explained that they had seen it all before, many times. If M.’s husband required long-term care, the costs would be catastrophic even for a middle-class family with savings.
Eventually, after the expenses whittled away their combined assets, her husband could go on Medicaid — but by then their children’s nest egg would be gone, along with her 401(k) plan. She would face a bleak retirement with neither her husband nor her savings.
A complicating factor was that this was a second marriage. M.’s first husband had died, leaving an inheritance that he had intended for their children. She and her second husband had a prenuptial agreement, but that would not protect her assets from his medical expenses.
The hospital told M. not to waste time in dissolving the marriage. For five years after any divorce, her assets could be seized — precisely because the government knows that people sometimes divorce husbands or wives to escape their medical bills." -- excerpt from Until Medical Bills Do Us Part, Nicholas D. Kristof, The New York Times, 8/29/2009

Although Mr. Kristof confuses health care with long term care and therefore comes to a hopelessly flawed conclusion, his account of his friend's story does highlight the many difficulties faced by those needing long term care and their families. Unfortunately, the editorial utterly ignores the existence of Long Term Care Insurance, which would have protected his friend's assets, marriage, and dignity. For more about Long Term Care Insurance, please see the previous entries in this blog. Coming soon -- part 2 of Medicare Supplement Insurance.

No comments:

Post a Comment