Mind the gap - UK goes unprotected says Barclays

Written by Barclays Bank
Monday, 01 December 2008

Despite the level of fear surrounding unemployment and debts in the current environment, research pubiished by Barclays Financial Planning shows a worrying trend of people not providing themselves and their families with a safety net.

Over half of people in the UK are worried about being able to maintain their outgoings within the next 12 months, pushing essential safety nets like income protection and critical illness cover to the bottom of their priorities. Results show, nearly half (47 per cent) of UK adults have no protection policies4 in place whatsoever to protect them and their families in the event of losing their income, health issues or even death.

The safety net gap:

· 52 per cent have no life insurance
· 75 per cent have no critical illness cover
· 78 per cent have no income protection cover

Those aged between 35 and 54 often have the most responsibilities in terms of dependants and outgoings, but showed a large gap in their protection cover, with 45 per cent having no life cover and 74 per cent with no income protection insurance.

Alison Tattersall, Head of Customer and Proposition at Barclays Financial Planning said: "When finances are tight it is often responsibilities like protection policies that fall to a lower priority, and of course these policies protect outcomes that people don't want to think about. But people must consider the financial consequences of what would happen if they were unable to work, or their dependants situation if they died, it would be far worse than any concerns they currently have over struggling to meet their outgoings.

"Our research indicates that a large number of people are without any protection at all, or that they don't realise they have any policies in force. Both are equally as worrying, especially the current climate."

When looking at what other safety nets people could be relying on, the research reveals that 60 per cent of people admit to having nothing saved, having less than one month's salary in the bank, or not knowing what they have in savings at all. Worryingly the report also reveals that nearly 40 per cent of people don't receive benefits such as sick pay, death in service or health insurance, or simply do not know if they would be entitled to them. Coupled with 81 per cent of people not knowing what they would receive in benefits from the state if they were too ill to work, it shows that many people haven't thought through their plan b.

Alison Tattersall continues: "This is a worrying trend. People need to know what their state and employee benefits are before they are able to plan their protection needs properly.

"Over half of people that do have protection policies said they did not take advice or did not know if they had taken advice when buying their cover, and over 70 per cent do not know or only have a rough idea what level of payout their policies would give them if a claim was made. This could clearly mean people end up without the right cover for their needs, which is often just as bad as having no protection at all. We urge people to seek professional advice and review the level of protection insurance they have to cover themselves or their family."

Medical Alert: All will feel the pain if hospitals lose substantial funding

Posted by Post-Standard Editorial Board November 28, 2008 5:02AM

Gov. David Paterson has laudably taken on the difficult but necessary task of cutting a state budget that is billions of dollars out of balance. But the size of his proposed cuts in Medicaid payments to hospitals could end up doing more harm than good.

The governor wants to cut more than $500 million in Medicaid in the 2008-09 budget alone, with more cuts predicted for the following budget year. Those cuts would take their toll on hospitals.

As the CEOs of Crouse, Community General, St. Joseph's and University hospitals pointed out at a Post-Standard editorial board meeting last week, hospitals serve as the primary medical safety net in the region. They are bound by the law to provide care for whomever comes through their doors -- and the numbers continue to climb as people lose jobs and health insurance and the local elderly population increases.


Patient volume already has increased 22 percent between 2003 and 2007 at the four hospitals, and the hospitals are feeling the strain. If things get much worse, one CEO said, he could foresee patients waiting up to 15 hours for care in the emergency rooms.

Yet hospitals are left to figure out how to absorb the growing numbers of patients -- a problem that can be traced back to the nation's inadequate health care delivery system -- while dealing with million-dollar cuts in their budgets. The four Syracuse hospitals stand to lose nearly $17 million over the next two years under Paterson's proposed cuts.

Hospital executives say they have managed to get by -- they don't have a choice -- but can't continue to operate with fewer funds and more patients.

New Yorkers who have health insurance may mistakenly believe that inadequate Medicaid reimbursements only affect low-income patients. But as one CEO explained, hospitals don't have "insured beds" and "Medicaid beds." They don't have a system that allows people with health insurance to skip the line in the emergency room. If an ER is backed up because it cannot handle all of the incoming patients, or the hospital doesn't have enough beds, insured patients will be just as affected as those without insurance. People who don't think so need only visit an emergency room.

The governor said that when it came to budget cuts, nothing was off the table. But the governor has consistently left one revenue-raiser off the table: He won't consider a millionaire's tax that would be temporarily placed on those with higher incomes -- as was done successfully under Gov. Pataki in 2003. The Assembly has passed such a measure, but it was rejected by the Senate.

Wealthy people would feel a pinch from such a tax. If a disproportionate share of the burden falls on hospitals, every New Yorker will eventually feel the pain.

She did it for love

Out of love for her then ailing husband, sales development manager Sheryl Fong gave him one of her kidneys four years ago.

Church pastor Kenneth Fong has since recovered.

The operation and hospitalisation fees for her alone cost more than $20,000. Because her insurance policy does not cover 'elective surgery', that had to be paid in cash.

Mrs Fong, 38, quit her sales manager job which paid her a comfortable salary of $7,000 a month so that she could take time to recuperate after the operation.

She remained jobless for four months before she found a new job as a sales development manager.

For six months after her operation, she had to go for monthly health check-ups at the hospital. Each check-up cost her more than $100, which she had to foot.

Today, she still has to go for annual blood and urine tests to ensure her single kidney is functioning well. The tests set her back by about $100 each time.

Despite the immense physical and financial sacrifices that she had made, Mrs Fong said that she has been more than compensated.

Mr Fong, 43, received a new lease of life and she got her life back, too. When he was ill, she used to have to nurse him day and night.

She finds it hard to imagine someone going through the same ordeal for a stranger.

'It will certainly help if the altruistic donor is reimbursed for surgery costs,' she said.

'It is not fair to the donor if after donating an organ, he still has to settle a huge debt for the surgery fees.'

She added: 'But the compensation should not be seen as a payment. There should be no price tag on the gift of life. It is priceless.'

Hughson couple's burden eases as husband gets a new job

By Eve Hightower
ehightower@modbee.com

Along with 1.4 million other Californians, Jerry King was out of work, applying for every job he could and looking for a break when The Modesto Bee wrote about him in September.

King finally got that break three weeks ago, when his old boss at Beck Properties called with a job offer for King and his wife, Debra.

"It's like a big, big rock was taken off of me," said King, a former home warranty representative.

King had been looking for a job for 17 months before his old boss called. As the unemployment numbers rose, he turned in hundreds of applications.

At the same time, his wife was recovering from cancer. Then she discovered another lump in her breast. With no health insurance, they sold their house to pay for medication. Meanwhile, the special medical aid she was getting was coming to an end.

Though faced with all of that, King had only good things to say about his former employer when interviewed for the story about his job search two months ago.

"They kept me as long as they could," he said then.

That loyalty and King's reputation as a hard worker won Mario Guerra's attention when he read the article in The Bee.

"There's only so much we can do in this economy. We can't help everyone, but I knew I could help them," said

Guerra, King's boss. "Jerry has always done a good job for us. So when this job came up, I thought of him."

Now Jerry and Debra King manage and maintain 592 storage units and moving trucks for B&R Self Storage in Stockton, which is owned by Beck Properties. The couple's new job comes with full health care benefits and a rent-free apartment.

"We're well taken care of. They're doing everything to make us feel comfortable," King said with a smile. "The bottom line is: Don't give up."

Guerra is glad to have King back.

"We go through life and just run across people and keep going. That article reminded me what a good guy Jerry is. We're all out there trying our best to find success. That's OK, but right now we need to take care of each other," he said.

Companies don't want to lose good people, he said. But their choices are limited in a bad economy. To stay alive, some companies have to lay off even their best employees. That doesn't mean they'll forget them.

"There's always a chance you'll be hired back after all this," Guerra said.

Debra King said it couldn't have happened at a better time.

"We never thought we'd be in such a bad situation. And Jerry was trying so hard to find work," she said. "There were times we didn't even have food. We had nothing."

Those times are behind them now, but the Kings realize they still would be in their Hughson mobile home fretting about medical bills had Guerra forgotten about his former employee.

"We got real lucky. A lot of good people are still out there feeling bad about not finding work," Jerry King said. "We just finally got a break. We're all looking for a break."

Bee staff writer Eve Hightower can be reached at ehightower@modbee.com or 578-2382.

Voters want solutions as health insurance costs rise sharply

By SUZANNE KING
Special to The Star

Working two jobs isn’t exactly the way Dave Coffman envisioned his retirement.

But that’s how it’s turning out.

“I’m working basically because of health care,” said Coffman, 62, a retired school principal who lives with his wife in Lee’s Summit.

Until they qualify for Medicare, they have to buy private coverage. For now, their insurance bills amount to around $1,000 a month — including long-term care insurance, dental insurance and a health plan that has a $2,500 deductible. If he weren’t working two part-time jobs, Coffman said, there would be no way he could afford it.

“I never once thought about health insurance before I retired,” Coffman said.

Now it’s never far from his mind.

Like many Americans, Coffman says that health care will be a top concern as he casts his ballot in November.

“I know that each of the parties has a (health care) plan, but definitely we need something to help provide insurance,” Coffman said.

Coffman doesn’t want to see socialized medicine, but he wants to see a government that forces health care providers to hold the line on costs and helps the people who can’t afford them pay their health care bills.

At a time when 45 million Americans lack health insurance, Coffman is hardly alone. Even people who are insured are paying more all the time. In the past four years, according to a report in the New England Journal of Medicine, insurance premiums have climbed 35 percent, to $4,400 for an individual policy and $12,000 for a family policy.

“When people say they’re worried about health care, they’re not worried about where they’re going to find a decent doctor or medical care — they’re worried about paying for it,” said John McDonald, senior state director for AARP Missouri.

Certainly health care is on the agenda of Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain.

Both candidates want to see a system that provides more affordable coverage to more people. And both talk about the need to cut costs; to improve efficiencies, partly through the use of information technology; to promote preventive care; to reduce errors; and to rein in medical malpractice lawsuits.

But the candidates’ fundamental approaches are vastly different.

Under McCain’s plan, individuals, not employers, would carry the responsibility for choosing and paying for health care.

Obama wants to shore up the current employer-based system by mandating more coverage and providing more subsidies.

“It’s a choice between adjusting the financing mechanism or a system of mandates,” said Maggie Nelson, manager for federal government and industry relations with Cerner Corp., the North Kansas City-based health care information technology company.

The McCain plan

Experts agree that McCain’s proposal is the most radical.

The senator from Arizona proposes eliminating the current tax exemption for employer-paid health insurance premiums — meaning people with job-based coverage would pay income tax on the premiums their employers pay, which are tax-free today. In exchange, he would provide a $2,500 tax credit to individuals and a $5,000 tax credit to families to buy their own insurance.

McCain’s camp argues that the system would give consumers more control, allowing them to keep insurance as they move from job to job, for example, while at the same time making them more aware of the true cost of going to the doctor.