My wife and I both took out LTC policies about 6 years ago. I was 52 at the time and she was 58. The reason we did so was to protect our retirement assets in case one of us needed high priced long term care. Old age isn't the only reason you may need this care. If one of us had a stroke or even a car accident that left us in need of daily care for the rest of our life, the other spouse could see their savings wiped out for the rest of their life too.

Paying the bill for this insurance hurts, but we do it because of the fact one of us could be left without savings. Secondary would be lessening the emotional burden to our kids if they had to make long term care decisions for us. I don't believe they are (or should be) obligated financially.

The biggest problem I've had with the policy is that when we signed, we were told that our yearly cost for the policy was locked in for the rest of our lives. That is not the case. The insurance company can and did petition the state to raise prices substantially. On the plus side, NY state does rebate some of the cost on your taxes. The states certainly have incentive for us to buy this insurance since the cost of Medicaid comes out of state budgets.

Anyway, that is the reason for us buying LTC.

Catch, I must admit that, for most of my life, I was clueless (could have cared less) about any long term planning. When my workplace first offered a LTC plan I had never heard of them before. Long story short, neither I nor my husband qualified at that point for the workplace plans. So we have enough savings, I figure, for one of us to be self-insured. On the other hand I have no children.

I find it odd that only people with children face the problem described in the WSJ article. I have always gladly paid taxes that supported other peoples children and the raising of the children, if necessary. There is only so much blood in a turnip. If the children are to take on more and more of their own expenses with a zillion savings accounts (HSA, 401k, 529, ...) and insurance policies like LTC, where does a child save or insure for their parent-risk especially as wages stagnate or go down while everything else goes up?

I don't know what the answer is in our culture but as I grow older I am getting an attitude. The boomers will die even if not given proper feeding and care. So I don't really care any more. However, the laws described need to be abolished. How can a society look at the dying vs the newborn and choose the dying? If society want to make a business of dying, then leave it as a society problem and collect taxes until people wise up. Talking things to death is ridiculous. The people doing the talking want a free lunch to magically appear but most ordinary people can't afford to pay for their own eventual care much less that of their parents. So the lawyers in the litgations will be the only ones collecting in many to most cases. Savings to government programs is probably small.

And yes, LTC policies were orginally underpriced so many people who bought unchangable policies have experienced increases.

As we enter the "golden years," I begin to doubt the wisdom of old teachings like not standing near trees in thunderstorms. Nope, don't got. Both in mid 60s, no kids, good health. Have to at least wonder whether the "probabilities" favor buying this stuff or just letting our savings run.

Today is a very important day for our country, our rights and our economy. Today the US Supreme Court is supposed to decided whether Obamacare is fully or partially or not at all, legal. I am not bringing this up to debate a hot political topic, but only because this decision will probably influence whether or not long term healthcare insurance can be a made mandatory or not. I believe it is only a matter of a several years before mandatory long term healthcare will be pushed forward, if the US SC upholds Obamacare. Whatever you buy today, could be out the window.

But putting this important decision to the side for the moment, I have not purchased long term healthcare coverage. As pointed out, a deal is not a deal, when one party can change the terms of the contract. Yes technically the insurance companies don't do this, the state does. But we know that the collective they, spend a lot of millions a year lobbying the states.

Not being the most knowledgeable on what is a very complicated insurance policy, my perception is that there are payout caps on the insurance policy. So if you or a love one is in a nursing home for a few years, then the insurance stops paying. But correct me if I am wrong.

The other caveat is the rising rate of the cost of care. Its historic rate of increase far exceeds the official inflation rate. What you think is sufficient coverage today, might be well short of the daily coverage in 20 years. You might buy coverage of $300 a day, but what if the cost when you need it is $1,200 a day?

Just my personal anecdote. My dad, who did not have long term care coverage, was mostly in but sometimes out of nursing homes for about 4 years, not including the rehabilitation stays which were covered by Medicare. The cost was around $10,000 a month because he required skilled nursing. Today that same cost would probably be about $12,000 a month. That cost included a state fee of $3,200 a year. I call that a tax, not a fee. Because with a fee you are suppose to be paying for something based on your exclusive usage. Most of his roommates were Medicaid patients. By law they could not receive lesser care than other paying patients. So how is this a fee? No, it was a tax for being very sick and not being able to take care of yourself. Government is so very compassionate.

If he had long term care insurance, I don't know how much would have been covered. Too many unknowns to guess. I think that is what my basic message is. Planning is so very hard for the individual, because our government cannot plan anything itself. They can't even decide on a definitive annual budget.

I retired twelve years ago at a relatively young age and the first thing I did upon retirement was to take out a LTC health insurance policy. At that time, I had a clean bill of health (no pre-existing conditions, no prior hospitalizations or medical problems of any sort) and the product was relatively new. As a result, most of the major insurance companies offering LTC policies had drastically underpriced their policies. I recognized this immediately and, even though I was probably 2-3 decades away from needing this coverage (assuming I did not sustain an unexpected injury or medical condition, e.g., auto accident, cancer, etc.) I enrolled in a policy because I knew I could do so at rock bottom prices.

At that time, several insurance companies offered policies in which one could pay higher yearly premiums but completely pay for lifetime coverage, with yearly cost-of-living coverage adjustments (increases) in their policies, after ten years. Amazingly, two large insurance companies offered the option of paying a large sum up front in one payment and obtaining lifetime coverage without ANY yearly or additional payments in future years. Needless to say, I jumped at this option and obtained lifetime LTC coverage with one large payment. Within two years, the insurance companies realized that these policies were disadvantageous and discontinued them so that they would have the option of increasing yearly premiums to keep pace with rising medical costs.

One important consideration for anyone considering LTC insurance policies ---- be certain that the insurance company you stake a policy with has the highest financial ratings for stability and solvency from ratings companies such as A.M. Best, S&P, Moody's etc. If your insurance company folds in the next decade or two before you actually need to use your LTC policy you are up a creek without a paddle and all of the money you have put into the policy is wasted. When I evaluated nearly ten LTC policies from major insurers over a decade ago, the companies which had the highest ratings were GE Capital Assurance, John Hancock and Allianz of Germany (highest rated at that time).

My personal opinion is that LTC insurance is essential and you are one accident or misfortune away from unexpectedly requiring a lifetime of home care assistance, residence in an assisted living facility or nursing home and without this coverage you will quickly be wiped out financially, then forced to live in a facility not of your choosing based upon what Medicaid coverage will provide for. If I am wrong about this, please correct me, but I believe this is THE most important form of insurance for one's retirement years.

I have a brother-in-law who lives and works in Singapore. He doesn't plan on returning to the USA anytime soon. I understand that the coverage doesn't begin until 2014, and I'm reasonably sure that he'll still be overseas at that time. I wonder if he'll have to pay into the health care plan or not as he's living and getting paid outside of the USA?

Beachfront properties in MI? If only Ann Arbor had such property!

Thanks msf! My wife received an email today from her brother saying that this is a common topic of conversation among Americans in Singapore now. A certified U.S. accountant has told him that he wouldn't have to pay into Obamacare, thanks for confirming!

Genworth: Not worth the effort

It appears the best final solution will be a plan where one simply falls off a roof.......