Tuesday, July 1, 2008

Insurance Companies: Pragmatic Virtue Police?

Stick with me here, I’m going to spring an idea I’ve been thinking about, but in which I am no kind of expert, actually I’ve still got my training wheels on I think.

Having recently done some initiating and switching of life/health/car insurance policies, etc. I couldn’t help but notice the lengthy inquiry into my personal life, my habits and lifestyle history in the insurance policy questionnaires that must be filled out before Company X will insure you. Then the waiting to see which “risk pool” you get tossed into (I think I am swimming in the “Preferred Plus, Non-smoker” pool, whatever that means). My understanding of insurance is the insurance companies need to get a history of your lifestyle so they can calculate how much “risk” or liability you will be to them. Meaning if you smoke a pack a day, have 10+ drinks a week, drive a motorcycle, have speeding tickets, have pre-existing medical condition (i.e. diabetes, etc.), received treatment for STDs, or had multiple pregnancies out of wedlock; I’m guessing they would put you in a “high-risk” pool and therefore your premiums (what you pay per month/year) will be higher for the same amount of coverage as someone who doesn’t smoke, drives a car (no tickets), has clean bill of health and no sexually promiscuous lifestyle.
So my comment is… who do they think they are?!?! How dare they judge me and discriminate against me because of my lifestyle?! Those are my own personal lifestyle decisions thank you very much! You can’t tell me what to do or force your rigid rules on me!!
(tongue extracted from cheek)
The truth is, they can and do. It is their business to assess liability, and some lifestyles are just more risky than others. Does that make it morally wrong to do those things? I don’t know, I haven’t made a one for one. I’m just trying to juxtaposition modern “moral relativism” with pragmatic insurance companies.
Two qualifying remarks:
1. Those of you foaming at the mouth because I glossed over pre-existing medical conditions in the list above, wipe the spittle off your chin… I acknowledge that many, many UNchosen providences account for conditions (diabetes, history of breast cancer, poor family situations/role models, no insurance at all!!! etc.) that are difficult to overcome. There is definitely a mix of willful and circumstantial factors and a lot of interdependencies on the dynamics of those factors. I just want to highlight the willful lifestyle choices.
2. Men are inherently evil, and men who work for and run insurance companies are no exception. Everyone is out to make a buck, often at others expense; and I’m sure insurance companies are at the tippy-top of that list. That said, the idea of getting insurance at all I think is still a legitimate one.
Take home points/questions:
1. Does getting insurance indicate a lack of faith in God, or rather being wise in protecting your family?
2. Is there a link between things that are morally wrong and things that make you “uninsurable”? Is pragmatism our highest standard? No, God’s moral law is, but is there a connection…? I think so.
3. The process has made me immensely thankful for my health, my strong family, my church, the hedges that God has graciously guarded me with all my life of which I don’t deserve.
4. There are many who can’t afford insurance, who also have bad habits, lifestyles we “churched people” might cringe at, who rely on the charity of others. What can we do and give at the local level in our churches/individually? What are our convictions about how the government should address the uninsured? I don’t have answers at this point.
Your thoughts?

No comments: