Life insurance that covers only simultaneous/dual deaths












35















This is probably a stupid idea ...



My wife and I both make decent salaries. We believe that either of us could raise our child on a single income if the other passed away. If both of us passed away, our current assets would not provide for our child. In that respect, we don't need what I will call typical term life insurance, but instead only need life insurance that will pay out when we both die (assuming we die within the term). This seems like it would change the risks of the insurance company and should result in a cheaper premium.



Does this product exist? If so what is it called?



If it does not exist, why not?










share|improve this question




















  • 29





    I would consider the possibility that an event which kills one of you could leave the other one unable to work (e.g. a car accident), or that the surviving spouse could lose their salary for unrelated reasons without passing away (fired, or medical issues make it impossible to work, etc). Ordinary life insurance would help provide a buffer against these scenarios as well.

    – Chris Hayes
    19 hours ago











  • Insurance on one person still leads to a payoff if you both die.

    – JPhi1618
    9 hours ago






  • 3





    @JPhi1618 sure, but the odds of us both dyeing is lower, so it should be cheaper to only pay out if we both die.

    – StrongBad
    8 hours ago











  • @ChrisHayes: crashnotaccident.com

    – whatsisname
    3 hours ago
















35















This is probably a stupid idea ...



My wife and I both make decent salaries. We believe that either of us could raise our child on a single income if the other passed away. If both of us passed away, our current assets would not provide for our child. In that respect, we don't need what I will call typical term life insurance, but instead only need life insurance that will pay out when we both die (assuming we die within the term). This seems like it would change the risks of the insurance company and should result in a cheaper premium.



Does this product exist? If so what is it called?



If it does not exist, why not?










share|improve this question




















  • 29





    I would consider the possibility that an event which kills one of you could leave the other one unable to work (e.g. a car accident), or that the surviving spouse could lose their salary for unrelated reasons without passing away (fired, or medical issues make it impossible to work, etc). Ordinary life insurance would help provide a buffer against these scenarios as well.

    – Chris Hayes
    19 hours ago











  • Insurance on one person still leads to a payoff if you both die.

    – JPhi1618
    9 hours ago






  • 3





    @JPhi1618 sure, but the odds of us both dyeing is lower, so it should be cheaper to only pay out if we both die.

    – StrongBad
    8 hours ago











  • @ChrisHayes: crashnotaccident.com

    – whatsisname
    3 hours ago














35












35








35








This is probably a stupid idea ...



My wife and I both make decent salaries. We believe that either of us could raise our child on a single income if the other passed away. If both of us passed away, our current assets would not provide for our child. In that respect, we don't need what I will call typical term life insurance, but instead only need life insurance that will pay out when we both die (assuming we die within the term). This seems like it would change the risks of the insurance company and should result in a cheaper premium.



Does this product exist? If so what is it called?



If it does not exist, why not?










share|improve this question
















This is probably a stupid idea ...



My wife and I both make decent salaries. We believe that either of us could raise our child on a single income if the other passed away. If both of us passed away, our current assets would not provide for our child. In that respect, we don't need what I will call typical term life insurance, but instead only need life insurance that will pay out when we both die (assuming we die within the term). This seems like it would change the risks of the insurance company and should result in a cheaper premium.



Does this product exist? If so what is it called?



If it does not exist, why not?







life-insurance






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited yesterday







StrongBad

















asked yesterday









StrongBadStrongBad

601516




601516








  • 29





    I would consider the possibility that an event which kills one of you could leave the other one unable to work (e.g. a car accident), or that the surviving spouse could lose their salary for unrelated reasons without passing away (fired, or medical issues make it impossible to work, etc). Ordinary life insurance would help provide a buffer against these scenarios as well.

    – Chris Hayes
    19 hours ago











  • Insurance on one person still leads to a payoff if you both die.

    – JPhi1618
    9 hours ago






  • 3





    @JPhi1618 sure, but the odds of us both dyeing is lower, so it should be cheaper to only pay out if we both die.

    – StrongBad
    8 hours ago











  • @ChrisHayes: crashnotaccident.com

    – whatsisname
    3 hours ago














  • 29





    I would consider the possibility that an event which kills one of you could leave the other one unable to work (e.g. a car accident), or that the surviving spouse could lose their salary for unrelated reasons without passing away (fired, or medical issues make it impossible to work, etc). Ordinary life insurance would help provide a buffer against these scenarios as well.

    – Chris Hayes
    19 hours ago











  • Insurance on one person still leads to a payoff if you both die.

    – JPhi1618
    9 hours ago






  • 3





    @JPhi1618 sure, but the odds of us both dyeing is lower, so it should be cheaper to only pay out if we both die.

    – StrongBad
    8 hours ago











  • @ChrisHayes: crashnotaccident.com

    – whatsisname
    3 hours ago








29




29





I would consider the possibility that an event which kills one of you could leave the other one unable to work (e.g. a car accident), or that the surviving spouse could lose their salary for unrelated reasons without passing away (fired, or medical issues make it impossible to work, etc). Ordinary life insurance would help provide a buffer against these scenarios as well.

– Chris Hayes
19 hours ago





I would consider the possibility that an event which kills one of you could leave the other one unable to work (e.g. a car accident), or that the surviving spouse could lose their salary for unrelated reasons without passing away (fired, or medical issues make it impossible to work, etc). Ordinary life insurance would help provide a buffer against these scenarios as well.

– Chris Hayes
19 hours ago













Insurance on one person still leads to a payoff if you both die.

– JPhi1618
9 hours ago





Insurance on one person still leads to a payoff if you both die.

– JPhi1618
9 hours ago




3




3





@JPhi1618 sure, but the odds of us both dyeing is lower, so it should be cheaper to only pay out if we both die.

– StrongBad
8 hours ago





@JPhi1618 sure, but the odds of us both dyeing is lower, so it should be cheaper to only pay out if we both die.

– StrongBad
8 hours ago













@ChrisHayes: crashnotaccident.com

– whatsisname
3 hours ago





@ChrisHayes: crashnotaccident.com

– whatsisname
3 hours ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















36














https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/secondtodieinsurance.asp




What is Second-To-Die Insurance



Second-to-die insurance is a type of life insurance on two people (usually married) that provides benefits to the beneficiaries only after the last surviving person on the policy dies. This differs from regular life insurance in that the surviving partner doesn't receive any benefits after the spouse dies. Thus, second-to-die insurance is used for estate planning







share|improve this answer
























  • According to this company The two most common types of survivorship life insurance are Universal Life and Whole Life insurance. Term life insurance, being only temporary coverage, doesn’t make sense for this type of coverage (as evidenced by the fact that, at the date of this writing, only one company offers such a product). By the time we retire, and hopefully well before then, we will have enough savings to support our child if we pass away so we are only looking for term insurance and not whole life.

    – StrongBad
    yesterday






  • 16





    @StrongBad "The two most common types of survivorship life insurance are (UL) and (WL) insurance." Contrary to popular opinion, the phrase "most common" does not mean "only".

    – RonJohn
    16 hours ago



















17














The product is called second to die as mentioned in Ronjon’s answer or survivorship life as you saw. I think you’ll find that the premiums for 2nd to die aren’t enough cheaper to make it the right choice for you. Especially considering that you would either continue to pay the premium after the first spouse dies or pay a higher initial premium if a rider is available to waive the premiums after the first death.



Probably your best option especially if you are focused on term insurance is to choose an amount that would provide for your dependents and split that amount of term insurance between the two of you. This offers a few benefits. One is that the premium after the first death would be smaller and could be dropped entirely if the insurance needs are covered by savings up to that future date and the proceeds of the first policy. Another is that if you considered the impact of the death of one of you on your ability to reach your education or retirement goals or possibly other goals you’d probably find there was at least some need that the smaller amounts of separate term insurance could cover. Your ability to save for those goals would likely be reduced on the death of one of you.






share|improve this answer



















  • 5





    If your plans involve "term life" and "dropping the insurance before the end of the term", you are making a bad plan. Term life almost always has a fixed price per unit time, and your payments early on are way over price, and your payments later on are way cheaper, than they would be. Insurance companies make bank by relying on people dropping a term life policy before it matures.

    – Yakk
    9 hours ago











  • @Yakk Do you have an alterantive suggestion? With renewable term life, you keep it until you are no longer in need of it. Since you can't know for sure when that is, the idea is to lock in a low rate so that you can continue to afford it if your situation changes.

    – JimmyJames
    7 hours ago






  • 1





    @JimmyJames Get a fixed term life. Make and execute a savings plan, starting now, to stuff money away for after the term ends, using usual techniques. Do not plan to cancel the term life before it ends. If someone is offering you a renewable term with actually low rates on the renew indefinitely, that is whole life dressed up as a term life. If they aren't, then the renew terms are going to be bad enough to handle the lemon problem and/or have other exclusions that make it less than useful, so you shouldn't plan on resubscribing. In either case, get term life.

    – Yakk
    6 hours ago













  • @JimmyJames (Note that a whole life policy could be part of your plan for after the term life ends, but it isn't a replacement for the purpose of term life.)

    – Yakk
    6 hours ago













  • @Yakk note that the OP indicates that his household income is well over pay-check to pay-check. Insurance policies provide protection against short-term disasters in exchange for long-term capital loss; so, if for he has a 300k 30yr term policy, and he saves up 300k in the next 5yrs, then dropping his term policy at that point would free up additional revenue to grow his investments faster. At this point his premiums allocation of funds would create capital gains instead resulting in a better retirement fund while still protecting his family's future. So, in this case, it can be a good move.

    – Nosajimiki
    5 hours ago



















1














As other's have mentioned in some jurisdictions this type of product is called second to die insurance. Alternatively it is called a Joint Life Second Death (JLSD) policy.



The premium for such a product will typically be smaller than a Single Life policy or a Joint Life First Death (JLFD) policy of the same duration, but it depends on how your insurance company structures the premium.



Typically these types of polices are taken out as Whole of Life (WoL or WL) policies (at least where I am located UL (Universal Life) is not a product sold on the market). Whether or not a term or WoL product is more appropriate for you is something you would need to consider.



You may also want to take out accident insurance or Permanent Disability Insurance (TPD) to mitigate against the situation where one of you survives but can't provide for your children.



You can also take out a policy that pays out twice, once for each life. These types of policy are called Dual Life (typically). They should (in general) be equivalent to a JLFD policy and a JLSD policy added together (though two separate policies may be slightly higher due to having to account for setting up two policies instead of one).



It is also possible to get deferred versions of these polices, which defer the start date of the policy to some point in the future.



Finally, you can get Unit Linked (investment style policies) and With Profits (aggregated investment type policies) which can augment the payout (but carry some investment risk as well).



As with anything potentially this complicated it is worth getting professional financial advice on.






share|improve this answer










New contributor




illustro is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 1





    "You can get Unit Linked and With Profits policies" - you can indeed, and insurance companies sell them because they make good profits for the insurance company, but not for the buyer. Rule 1 of buying insurance: never mix insurance and investment!

    – alephzero
    10 hours ago











  • @alephzero it really depends on when you buy them (and what jurisdiction you are in) for that sort of statement to hold. It also depends on the specifics of the policy.

    – illustro
    10 hours ago






  • 1





    Also insurance companies sell all of their products because they make good profits for the insurance companies! So I don't see that as a particular criticism of Unit Linked or With Profits policies.

    – illustro
    10 hours ago











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "93"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmoney.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f106483%2flife-insurance-that-covers-only-simultaneous-dual-deaths%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes








3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









36














https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/secondtodieinsurance.asp




What is Second-To-Die Insurance



Second-to-die insurance is a type of life insurance on two people (usually married) that provides benefits to the beneficiaries only after the last surviving person on the policy dies. This differs from regular life insurance in that the surviving partner doesn't receive any benefits after the spouse dies. Thus, second-to-die insurance is used for estate planning







share|improve this answer
























  • According to this company The two most common types of survivorship life insurance are Universal Life and Whole Life insurance. Term life insurance, being only temporary coverage, doesn’t make sense for this type of coverage (as evidenced by the fact that, at the date of this writing, only one company offers such a product). By the time we retire, and hopefully well before then, we will have enough savings to support our child if we pass away so we are only looking for term insurance and not whole life.

    – StrongBad
    yesterday






  • 16





    @StrongBad "The two most common types of survivorship life insurance are (UL) and (WL) insurance." Contrary to popular opinion, the phrase "most common" does not mean "only".

    – RonJohn
    16 hours ago
















36














https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/secondtodieinsurance.asp




What is Second-To-Die Insurance



Second-to-die insurance is a type of life insurance on two people (usually married) that provides benefits to the beneficiaries only after the last surviving person on the policy dies. This differs from regular life insurance in that the surviving partner doesn't receive any benefits after the spouse dies. Thus, second-to-die insurance is used for estate planning







share|improve this answer
























  • According to this company The two most common types of survivorship life insurance are Universal Life and Whole Life insurance. Term life insurance, being only temporary coverage, doesn’t make sense for this type of coverage (as evidenced by the fact that, at the date of this writing, only one company offers such a product). By the time we retire, and hopefully well before then, we will have enough savings to support our child if we pass away so we are only looking for term insurance and not whole life.

    – StrongBad
    yesterday






  • 16





    @StrongBad "The two most common types of survivorship life insurance are (UL) and (WL) insurance." Contrary to popular opinion, the phrase "most common" does not mean "only".

    – RonJohn
    16 hours ago














36












36








36







https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/secondtodieinsurance.asp




What is Second-To-Die Insurance



Second-to-die insurance is a type of life insurance on two people (usually married) that provides benefits to the beneficiaries only after the last surviving person on the policy dies. This differs from regular life insurance in that the surviving partner doesn't receive any benefits after the spouse dies. Thus, second-to-die insurance is used for estate planning







share|improve this answer













https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/secondtodieinsurance.asp




What is Second-To-Die Insurance



Second-to-die insurance is a type of life insurance on two people (usually married) that provides benefits to the beneficiaries only after the last surviving person on the policy dies. This differs from regular life insurance in that the surviving partner doesn't receive any benefits after the spouse dies. Thus, second-to-die insurance is used for estate planning








share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered yesterday









RonJohnRonJohn

13k42458




13k42458













  • According to this company The two most common types of survivorship life insurance are Universal Life and Whole Life insurance. Term life insurance, being only temporary coverage, doesn’t make sense for this type of coverage (as evidenced by the fact that, at the date of this writing, only one company offers such a product). By the time we retire, and hopefully well before then, we will have enough savings to support our child if we pass away so we are only looking for term insurance and not whole life.

    – StrongBad
    yesterday






  • 16





    @StrongBad "The two most common types of survivorship life insurance are (UL) and (WL) insurance." Contrary to popular opinion, the phrase "most common" does not mean "only".

    – RonJohn
    16 hours ago



















  • According to this company The two most common types of survivorship life insurance are Universal Life and Whole Life insurance. Term life insurance, being only temporary coverage, doesn’t make sense for this type of coverage (as evidenced by the fact that, at the date of this writing, only one company offers such a product). By the time we retire, and hopefully well before then, we will have enough savings to support our child if we pass away so we are only looking for term insurance and not whole life.

    – StrongBad
    yesterday






  • 16





    @StrongBad "The two most common types of survivorship life insurance are (UL) and (WL) insurance." Contrary to popular opinion, the phrase "most common" does not mean "only".

    – RonJohn
    16 hours ago

















According to this company The two most common types of survivorship life insurance are Universal Life and Whole Life insurance. Term life insurance, being only temporary coverage, doesn’t make sense for this type of coverage (as evidenced by the fact that, at the date of this writing, only one company offers such a product). By the time we retire, and hopefully well before then, we will have enough savings to support our child if we pass away so we are only looking for term insurance and not whole life.

– StrongBad
yesterday





According to this company The two most common types of survivorship life insurance are Universal Life and Whole Life insurance. Term life insurance, being only temporary coverage, doesn’t make sense for this type of coverage (as evidenced by the fact that, at the date of this writing, only one company offers such a product). By the time we retire, and hopefully well before then, we will have enough savings to support our child if we pass away so we are only looking for term insurance and not whole life.

– StrongBad
yesterday




16




16





@StrongBad "The two most common types of survivorship life insurance are (UL) and (WL) insurance." Contrary to popular opinion, the phrase "most common" does not mean "only".

– RonJohn
16 hours ago





@StrongBad "The two most common types of survivorship life insurance are (UL) and (WL) insurance." Contrary to popular opinion, the phrase "most common" does not mean "only".

– RonJohn
16 hours ago













17














The product is called second to die as mentioned in Ronjon’s answer or survivorship life as you saw. I think you’ll find that the premiums for 2nd to die aren’t enough cheaper to make it the right choice for you. Especially considering that you would either continue to pay the premium after the first spouse dies or pay a higher initial premium if a rider is available to waive the premiums after the first death.



Probably your best option especially if you are focused on term insurance is to choose an amount that would provide for your dependents and split that amount of term insurance between the two of you. This offers a few benefits. One is that the premium after the first death would be smaller and could be dropped entirely if the insurance needs are covered by savings up to that future date and the proceeds of the first policy. Another is that if you considered the impact of the death of one of you on your ability to reach your education or retirement goals or possibly other goals you’d probably find there was at least some need that the smaller amounts of separate term insurance could cover. Your ability to save for those goals would likely be reduced on the death of one of you.






share|improve this answer



















  • 5





    If your plans involve "term life" and "dropping the insurance before the end of the term", you are making a bad plan. Term life almost always has a fixed price per unit time, and your payments early on are way over price, and your payments later on are way cheaper, than they would be. Insurance companies make bank by relying on people dropping a term life policy before it matures.

    – Yakk
    9 hours ago











  • @Yakk Do you have an alterantive suggestion? With renewable term life, you keep it until you are no longer in need of it. Since you can't know for sure when that is, the idea is to lock in a low rate so that you can continue to afford it if your situation changes.

    – JimmyJames
    7 hours ago






  • 1





    @JimmyJames Get a fixed term life. Make and execute a savings plan, starting now, to stuff money away for after the term ends, using usual techniques. Do not plan to cancel the term life before it ends. If someone is offering you a renewable term with actually low rates on the renew indefinitely, that is whole life dressed up as a term life. If they aren't, then the renew terms are going to be bad enough to handle the lemon problem and/or have other exclusions that make it less than useful, so you shouldn't plan on resubscribing. In either case, get term life.

    – Yakk
    6 hours ago













  • @JimmyJames (Note that a whole life policy could be part of your plan for after the term life ends, but it isn't a replacement for the purpose of term life.)

    – Yakk
    6 hours ago













  • @Yakk note that the OP indicates that his household income is well over pay-check to pay-check. Insurance policies provide protection against short-term disasters in exchange for long-term capital loss; so, if for he has a 300k 30yr term policy, and he saves up 300k in the next 5yrs, then dropping his term policy at that point would free up additional revenue to grow his investments faster. At this point his premiums allocation of funds would create capital gains instead resulting in a better retirement fund while still protecting his family's future. So, in this case, it can be a good move.

    – Nosajimiki
    5 hours ago
















17














The product is called second to die as mentioned in Ronjon’s answer or survivorship life as you saw. I think you’ll find that the premiums for 2nd to die aren’t enough cheaper to make it the right choice for you. Especially considering that you would either continue to pay the premium after the first spouse dies or pay a higher initial premium if a rider is available to waive the premiums after the first death.



Probably your best option especially if you are focused on term insurance is to choose an amount that would provide for your dependents and split that amount of term insurance between the two of you. This offers a few benefits. One is that the premium after the first death would be smaller and could be dropped entirely if the insurance needs are covered by savings up to that future date and the proceeds of the first policy. Another is that if you considered the impact of the death of one of you on your ability to reach your education or retirement goals or possibly other goals you’d probably find there was at least some need that the smaller amounts of separate term insurance could cover. Your ability to save for those goals would likely be reduced on the death of one of you.






share|improve this answer



















  • 5





    If your plans involve "term life" and "dropping the insurance before the end of the term", you are making a bad plan. Term life almost always has a fixed price per unit time, and your payments early on are way over price, and your payments later on are way cheaper, than they would be. Insurance companies make bank by relying on people dropping a term life policy before it matures.

    – Yakk
    9 hours ago











  • @Yakk Do you have an alterantive suggestion? With renewable term life, you keep it until you are no longer in need of it. Since you can't know for sure when that is, the idea is to lock in a low rate so that you can continue to afford it if your situation changes.

    – JimmyJames
    7 hours ago






  • 1





    @JimmyJames Get a fixed term life. Make and execute a savings plan, starting now, to stuff money away for after the term ends, using usual techniques. Do not plan to cancel the term life before it ends. If someone is offering you a renewable term with actually low rates on the renew indefinitely, that is whole life dressed up as a term life. If they aren't, then the renew terms are going to be bad enough to handle the lemon problem and/or have other exclusions that make it less than useful, so you shouldn't plan on resubscribing. In either case, get term life.

    – Yakk
    6 hours ago













  • @JimmyJames (Note that a whole life policy could be part of your plan for after the term life ends, but it isn't a replacement for the purpose of term life.)

    – Yakk
    6 hours ago













  • @Yakk note that the OP indicates that his household income is well over pay-check to pay-check. Insurance policies provide protection against short-term disasters in exchange for long-term capital loss; so, if for he has a 300k 30yr term policy, and he saves up 300k in the next 5yrs, then dropping his term policy at that point would free up additional revenue to grow his investments faster. At this point his premiums allocation of funds would create capital gains instead resulting in a better retirement fund while still protecting his family's future. So, in this case, it can be a good move.

    – Nosajimiki
    5 hours ago














17












17








17







The product is called second to die as mentioned in Ronjon’s answer or survivorship life as you saw. I think you’ll find that the premiums for 2nd to die aren’t enough cheaper to make it the right choice for you. Especially considering that you would either continue to pay the premium after the first spouse dies or pay a higher initial premium if a rider is available to waive the premiums after the first death.



Probably your best option especially if you are focused on term insurance is to choose an amount that would provide for your dependents and split that amount of term insurance between the two of you. This offers a few benefits. One is that the premium after the first death would be smaller and could be dropped entirely if the insurance needs are covered by savings up to that future date and the proceeds of the first policy. Another is that if you considered the impact of the death of one of you on your ability to reach your education or retirement goals or possibly other goals you’d probably find there was at least some need that the smaller amounts of separate term insurance could cover. Your ability to save for those goals would likely be reduced on the death of one of you.






share|improve this answer













The product is called second to die as mentioned in Ronjon’s answer or survivorship life as you saw. I think you’ll find that the premiums for 2nd to die aren’t enough cheaper to make it the right choice for you. Especially considering that you would either continue to pay the premium after the first spouse dies or pay a higher initial premium if a rider is available to waive the premiums after the first death.



Probably your best option especially if you are focused on term insurance is to choose an amount that would provide for your dependents and split that amount of term insurance between the two of you. This offers a few benefits. One is that the premium after the first death would be smaller and could be dropped entirely if the insurance needs are covered by savings up to that future date and the proceeds of the first policy. Another is that if you considered the impact of the death of one of you on your ability to reach your education or retirement goals or possibly other goals you’d probably find there was at least some need that the smaller amounts of separate term insurance could cover. Your ability to save for those goals would likely be reduced on the death of one of you.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 19 hours ago









T. M.T. M.

60518




60518








  • 5





    If your plans involve "term life" and "dropping the insurance before the end of the term", you are making a bad plan. Term life almost always has a fixed price per unit time, and your payments early on are way over price, and your payments later on are way cheaper, than they would be. Insurance companies make bank by relying on people dropping a term life policy before it matures.

    – Yakk
    9 hours ago











  • @Yakk Do you have an alterantive suggestion? With renewable term life, you keep it until you are no longer in need of it. Since you can't know for sure when that is, the idea is to lock in a low rate so that you can continue to afford it if your situation changes.

    – JimmyJames
    7 hours ago






  • 1





    @JimmyJames Get a fixed term life. Make and execute a savings plan, starting now, to stuff money away for after the term ends, using usual techniques. Do not plan to cancel the term life before it ends. If someone is offering you a renewable term with actually low rates on the renew indefinitely, that is whole life dressed up as a term life. If they aren't, then the renew terms are going to be bad enough to handle the lemon problem and/or have other exclusions that make it less than useful, so you shouldn't plan on resubscribing. In either case, get term life.

    – Yakk
    6 hours ago













  • @JimmyJames (Note that a whole life policy could be part of your plan for after the term life ends, but it isn't a replacement for the purpose of term life.)

    – Yakk
    6 hours ago













  • @Yakk note that the OP indicates that his household income is well over pay-check to pay-check. Insurance policies provide protection against short-term disasters in exchange for long-term capital loss; so, if for he has a 300k 30yr term policy, and he saves up 300k in the next 5yrs, then dropping his term policy at that point would free up additional revenue to grow his investments faster. At this point his premiums allocation of funds would create capital gains instead resulting in a better retirement fund while still protecting his family's future. So, in this case, it can be a good move.

    – Nosajimiki
    5 hours ago














  • 5





    If your plans involve "term life" and "dropping the insurance before the end of the term", you are making a bad plan. Term life almost always has a fixed price per unit time, and your payments early on are way over price, and your payments later on are way cheaper, than they would be. Insurance companies make bank by relying on people dropping a term life policy before it matures.

    – Yakk
    9 hours ago











  • @Yakk Do you have an alterantive suggestion? With renewable term life, you keep it until you are no longer in need of it. Since you can't know for sure when that is, the idea is to lock in a low rate so that you can continue to afford it if your situation changes.

    – JimmyJames
    7 hours ago






  • 1





    @JimmyJames Get a fixed term life. Make and execute a savings plan, starting now, to stuff money away for after the term ends, using usual techniques. Do not plan to cancel the term life before it ends. If someone is offering you a renewable term with actually low rates on the renew indefinitely, that is whole life dressed up as a term life. If they aren't, then the renew terms are going to be bad enough to handle the lemon problem and/or have other exclusions that make it less than useful, so you shouldn't plan on resubscribing. In either case, get term life.

    – Yakk
    6 hours ago













  • @JimmyJames (Note that a whole life policy could be part of your plan for after the term life ends, but it isn't a replacement for the purpose of term life.)

    – Yakk
    6 hours ago













  • @Yakk note that the OP indicates that his household income is well over pay-check to pay-check. Insurance policies provide protection against short-term disasters in exchange for long-term capital loss; so, if for he has a 300k 30yr term policy, and he saves up 300k in the next 5yrs, then dropping his term policy at that point would free up additional revenue to grow his investments faster. At this point his premiums allocation of funds would create capital gains instead resulting in a better retirement fund while still protecting his family's future. So, in this case, it can be a good move.

    – Nosajimiki
    5 hours ago








5




5





If your plans involve "term life" and "dropping the insurance before the end of the term", you are making a bad plan. Term life almost always has a fixed price per unit time, and your payments early on are way over price, and your payments later on are way cheaper, than they would be. Insurance companies make bank by relying on people dropping a term life policy before it matures.

– Yakk
9 hours ago





If your plans involve "term life" and "dropping the insurance before the end of the term", you are making a bad plan. Term life almost always has a fixed price per unit time, and your payments early on are way over price, and your payments later on are way cheaper, than they would be. Insurance companies make bank by relying on people dropping a term life policy before it matures.

– Yakk
9 hours ago













@Yakk Do you have an alterantive suggestion? With renewable term life, you keep it until you are no longer in need of it. Since you can't know for sure when that is, the idea is to lock in a low rate so that you can continue to afford it if your situation changes.

– JimmyJames
7 hours ago





@Yakk Do you have an alterantive suggestion? With renewable term life, you keep it until you are no longer in need of it. Since you can't know for sure when that is, the idea is to lock in a low rate so that you can continue to afford it if your situation changes.

– JimmyJames
7 hours ago




1




1





@JimmyJames Get a fixed term life. Make and execute a savings plan, starting now, to stuff money away for after the term ends, using usual techniques. Do not plan to cancel the term life before it ends. If someone is offering you a renewable term with actually low rates on the renew indefinitely, that is whole life dressed up as a term life. If they aren't, then the renew terms are going to be bad enough to handle the lemon problem and/or have other exclusions that make it less than useful, so you shouldn't plan on resubscribing. In either case, get term life.

– Yakk
6 hours ago







@JimmyJames Get a fixed term life. Make and execute a savings plan, starting now, to stuff money away for after the term ends, using usual techniques. Do not plan to cancel the term life before it ends. If someone is offering you a renewable term with actually low rates on the renew indefinitely, that is whole life dressed up as a term life. If they aren't, then the renew terms are going to be bad enough to handle the lemon problem and/or have other exclusions that make it less than useful, so you shouldn't plan on resubscribing. In either case, get term life.

– Yakk
6 hours ago















@JimmyJames (Note that a whole life policy could be part of your plan for after the term life ends, but it isn't a replacement for the purpose of term life.)

– Yakk
6 hours ago







@JimmyJames (Note that a whole life policy could be part of your plan for after the term life ends, but it isn't a replacement for the purpose of term life.)

– Yakk
6 hours ago















@Yakk note that the OP indicates that his household income is well over pay-check to pay-check. Insurance policies provide protection against short-term disasters in exchange for long-term capital loss; so, if for he has a 300k 30yr term policy, and he saves up 300k in the next 5yrs, then dropping his term policy at that point would free up additional revenue to grow his investments faster. At this point his premiums allocation of funds would create capital gains instead resulting in a better retirement fund while still protecting his family's future. So, in this case, it can be a good move.

– Nosajimiki
5 hours ago





@Yakk note that the OP indicates that his household income is well over pay-check to pay-check. Insurance policies provide protection against short-term disasters in exchange for long-term capital loss; so, if for he has a 300k 30yr term policy, and he saves up 300k in the next 5yrs, then dropping his term policy at that point would free up additional revenue to grow his investments faster. At this point his premiums allocation of funds would create capital gains instead resulting in a better retirement fund while still protecting his family's future. So, in this case, it can be a good move.

– Nosajimiki
5 hours ago











1














As other's have mentioned in some jurisdictions this type of product is called second to die insurance. Alternatively it is called a Joint Life Second Death (JLSD) policy.



The premium for such a product will typically be smaller than a Single Life policy or a Joint Life First Death (JLFD) policy of the same duration, but it depends on how your insurance company structures the premium.



Typically these types of polices are taken out as Whole of Life (WoL or WL) policies (at least where I am located UL (Universal Life) is not a product sold on the market). Whether or not a term or WoL product is more appropriate for you is something you would need to consider.



You may also want to take out accident insurance or Permanent Disability Insurance (TPD) to mitigate against the situation where one of you survives but can't provide for your children.



You can also take out a policy that pays out twice, once for each life. These types of policy are called Dual Life (typically). They should (in general) be equivalent to a JLFD policy and a JLSD policy added together (though two separate policies may be slightly higher due to having to account for setting up two policies instead of one).



It is also possible to get deferred versions of these polices, which defer the start date of the policy to some point in the future.



Finally, you can get Unit Linked (investment style policies) and With Profits (aggregated investment type policies) which can augment the payout (but carry some investment risk as well).



As with anything potentially this complicated it is worth getting professional financial advice on.






share|improve this answer










New contributor




illustro is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 1





    "You can get Unit Linked and With Profits policies" - you can indeed, and insurance companies sell them because they make good profits for the insurance company, but not for the buyer. Rule 1 of buying insurance: never mix insurance and investment!

    – alephzero
    10 hours ago











  • @alephzero it really depends on when you buy them (and what jurisdiction you are in) for that sort of statement to hold. It also depends on the specifics of the policy.

    – illustro
    10 hours ago






  • 1





    Also insurance companies sell all of their products because they make good profits for the insurance companies! So I don't see that as a particular criticism of Unit Linked or With Profits policies.

    – illustro
    10 hours ago
















1














As other's have mentioned in some jurisdictions this type of product is called second to die insurance. Alternatively it is called a Joint Life Second Death (JLSD) policy.



The premium for such a product will typically be smaller than a Single Life policy or a Joint Life First Death (JLFD) policy of the same duration, but it depends on how your insurance company structures the premium.



Typically these types of polices are taken out as Whole of Life (WoL or WL) policies (at least where I am located UL (Universal Life) is not a product sold on the market). Whether or not a term or WoL product is more appropriate for you is something you would need to consider.



You may also want to take out accident insurance or Permanent Disability Insurance (TPD) to mitigate against the situation where one of you survives but can't provide for your children.



You can also take out a policy that pays out twice, once for each life. These types of policy are called Dual Life (typically). They should (in general) be equivalent to a JLFD policy and a JLSD policy added together (though two separate policies may be slightly higher due to having to account for setting up two policies instead of one).



It is also possible to get deferred versions of these polices, which defer the start date of the policy to some point in the future.



Finally, you can get Unit Linked (investment style policies) and With Profits (aggregated investment type policies) which can augment the payout (but carry some investment risk as well).



As with anything potentially this complicated it is worth getting professional financial advice on.






share|improve this answer










New contributor




illustro is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 1





    "You can get Unit Linked and With Profits policies" - you can indeed, and insurance companies sell them because they make good profits for the insurance company, but not for the buyer. Rule 1 of buying insurance: never mix insurance and investment!

    – alephzero
    10 hours ago











  • @alephzero it really depends on when you buy them (and what jurisdiction you are in) for that sort of statement to hold. It also depends on the specifics of the policy.

    – illustro
    10 hours ago






  • 1





    Also insurance companies sell all of their products because they make good profits for the insurance companies! So I don't see that as a particular criticism of Unit Linked or With Profits policies.

    – illustro
    10 hours ago














1












1








1







As other's have mentioned in some jurisdictions this type of product is called second to die insurance. Alternatively it is called a Joint Life Second Death (JLSD) policy.



The premium for such a product will typically be smaller than a Single Life policy or a Joint Life First Death (JLFD) policy of the same duration, but it depends on how your insurance company structures the premium.



Typically these types of polices are taken out as Whole of Life (WoL or WL) policies (at least where I am located UL (Universal Life) is not a product sold on the market). Whether or not a term or WoL product is more appropriate for you is something you would need to consider.



You may also want to take out accident insurance or Permanent Disability Insurance (TPD) to mitigate against the situation where one of you survives but can't provide for your children.



You can also take out a policy that pays out twice, once for each life. These types of policy are called Dual Life (typically). They should (in general) be equivalent to a JLFD policy and a JLSD policy added together (though two separate policies may be slightly higher due to having to account for setting up two policies instead of one).



It is also possible to get deferred versions of these polices, which defer the start date of the policy to some point in the future.



Finally, you can get Unit Linked (investment style policies) and With Profits (aggregated investment type policies) which can augment the payout (but carry some investment risk as well).



As with anything potentially this complicated it is worth getting professional financial advice on.






share|improve this answer










New contributor




illustro is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.










As other's have mentioned in some jurisdictions this type of product is called second to die insurance. Alternatively it is called a Joint Life Second Death (JLSD) policy.



The premium for such a product will typically be smaller than a Single Life policy or a Joint Life First Death (JLFD) policy of the same duration, but it depends on how your insurance company structures the premium.



Typically these types of polices are taken out as Whole of Life (WoL or WL) policies (at least where I am located UL (Universal Life) is not a product sold on the market). Whether or not a term or WoL product is more appropriate for you is something you would need to consider.



You may also want to take out accident insurance or Permanent Disability Insurance (TPD) to mitigate against the situation where one of you survives but can't provide for your children.



You can also take out a policy that pays out twice, once for each life. These types of policy are called Dual Life (typically). They should (in general) be equivalent to a JLFD policy and a JLSD policy added together (though two separate policies may be slightly higher due to having to account for setting up two policies instead of one).



It is also possible to get deferred versions of these polices, which defer the start date of the policy to some point in the future.



Finally, you can get Unit Linked (investment style policies) and With Profits (aggregated investment type policies) which can augment the payout (but carry some investment risk as well).



As with anything potentially this complicated it is worth getting professional financial advice on.







share|improve this answer










New contributor




illustro is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 8 hours ago





















New contributor




illustro is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









answered 11 hours ago









illustroillustro

1112




1112




New contributor




illustro is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





illustro is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






illustro is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








  • 1





    "You can get Unit Linked and With Profits policies" - you can indeed, and insurance companies sell them because they make good profits for the insurance company, but not for the buyer. Rule 1 of buying insurance: never mix insurance and investment!

    – alephzero
    10 hours ago











  • @alephzero it really depends on when you buy them (and what jurisdiction you are in) for that sort of statement to hold. It also depends on the specifics of the policy.

    – illustro
    10 hours ago






  • 1





    Also insurance companies sell all of their products because they make good profits for the insurance companies! So I don't see that as a particular criticism of Unit Linked or With Profits policies.

    – illustro
    10 hours ago














  • 1





    "You can get Unit Linked and With Profits policies" - you can indeed, and insurance companies sell them because they make good profits for the insurance company, but not for the buyer. Rule 1 of buying insurance: never mix insurance and investment!

    – alephzero
    10 hours ago











  • @alephzero it really depends on when you buy them (and what jurisdiction you are in) for that sort of statement to hold. It also depends on the specifics of the policy.

    – illustro
    10 hours ago






  • 1





    Also insurance companies sell all of their products because they make good profits for the insurance companies! So I don't see that as a particular criticism of Unit Linked or With Profits policies.

    – illustro
    10 hours ago








1




1





"You can get Unit Linked and With Profits policies" - you can indeed, and insurance companies sell them because they make good profits for the insurance company, but not for the buyer. Rule 1 of buying insurance: never mix insurance and investment!

– alephzero
10 hours ago





"You can get Unit Linked and With Profits policies" - you can indeed, and insurance companies sell them because they make good profits for the insurance company, but not for the buyer. Rule 1 of buying insurance: never mix insurance and investment!

– alephzero
10 hours ago













@alephzero it really depends on when you buy them (and what jurisdiction you are in) for that sort of statement to hold. It also depends on the specifics of the policy.

– illustro
10 hours ago





@alephzero it really depends on when you buy them (and what jurisdiction you are in) for that sort of statement to hold. It also depends on the specifics of the policy.

– illustro
10 hours ago




1




1





Also insurance companies sell all of their products because they make good profits for the insurance companies! So I don't see that as a particular criticism of Unit Linked or With Profits policies.

– illustro
10 hours ago





Also insurance companies sell all of their products because they make good profits for the insurance companies! So I don't see that as a particular criticism of Unit Linked or With Profits policies.

– illustro
10 hours ago


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Personal Finance & Money Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmoney.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f106483%2flife-insurance-that-covers-only-simultaneous-dual-deaths%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Plaza Victoria

Puebla de Zaragoza

Musa