To insure or not to insure?
April 18, 2013 7:12 AM Subscribe
My partner and I have an income disparity. We try to split costs 50/50. However, I now have the option to insure her as a dependent, but she can't afford to pay her half of the premium.
We are not married but have lived together long enough for her to qualify as a "domestic partner" under this policy. I've done this before on another, much cheaper plan when she could afford to pay half of the monthly expenses. With few exceptions, we split all of our monthly living expenses: rent, utilities, supplies, groceries. In the past I have covered other extra expenses (travel, etc.) but for monthly living expenses like rent and utilities we have always felt more comfortable keeping costs low and splitting them evenly. If we split the premium for this plan, she can't afford to pay half, so she could only be on the plan if I started paying the majority of the (significantly large) monthly insurance cost.
My fear is that, on the one hand, if I did this, I would be supporting her financially, which might change the relationship in ways that we tried to avoid by splitting costs evenly. And on the other hand, if I don't support her, I feel I am being selfish or cheap, and that might damage the relationship too.
We are both young and healthy so there's no serious medical reason she needs to be insured (in fact, she never even used the plan she was on before) but since i know I could afford to pay the extra monthly premiums, I feel somehow responsible for her. Her job does not provide insurance, and her income is somewhat unpredictable. If I opted to not insure her, I would feel guilty for putting her at risk just to save money. I have talked to her about this and she says that I am not responsible for her, that I should just not put her on the policy, but I don't feel happy with this conclusion.
I feel like either outcome could damage the relationship, and I am happy with the way things are. We really never have had any conflict over money, and I don't want this issue to introduce a financial burden on our relationship. How can I maintain the status quo here? We both want to keep expenses even – I spend well below my means, and I have absolutely no problem doing so – but this insurance issue is really triggering my protective instinct. Am I worrying about this too much?
(To be clear, under this policy, the premium for insuring myself and a spouse/partner is much higher than the premium for insuring just myself. It would be a most than 200% increase in cost if she is on the plan, and amount to about 10% of my paycheck. Yes, it is a shitty plan. Hence the frustration.)
We are not married but have lived together long enough for her to qualify as a "domestic partner" under this policy. I've done this before on another, much cheaper plan when she could afford to pay half of the monthly expenses. With few exceptions, we split all of our monthly living expenses: rent, utilities, supplies, groceries. In the past I have covered other extra expenses (travel, etc.) but for monthly living expenses like rent and utilities we have always felt more comfortable keeping costs low and splitting them evenly. If we split the premium for this plan, she can't afford to pay half, so she could only be on the plan if I started paying the majority of the (significantly large) monthly insurance cost.
My fear is that, on the one hand, if I did this, I would be supporting her financially, which might change the relationship in ways that we tried to avoid by splitting costs evenly. And on the other hand, if I don't support her, I feel I am being selfish or cheap, and that might damage the relationship too.
We are both young and healthy so there's no serious medical reason she needs to be insured (in fact, she never even used the plan she was on before) but since i know I could afford to pay the extra monthly premiums, I feel somehow responsible for her. Her job does not provide insurance, and her income is somewhat unpredictable. If I opted to not insure her, I would feel guilty for putting her at risk just to save money. I have talked to her about this and she says that I am not responsible for her, that I should just not put her on the policy, but I don't feel happy with this conclusion.
I feel like either outcome could damage the relationship, and I am happy with the way things are. We really never have had any conflict over money, and I don't want this issue to introduce a financial burden on our relationship. How can I maintain the status quo here? We both want to keep expenses even – I spend well below my means, and I have absolutely no problem doing so – but this insurance issue is really triggering my protective instinct. Am I worrying about this too much?
(To be clear, under this policy, the premium for insuring myself and a spouse/partner is much higher than the premium for insuring just myself. It would be a most than 200% increase in cost if she is on the plan, and amount to about 10% of my paycheck. Yes, it is a shitty plan. Hence the frustration.)
Well, to say she is healthy and does not need a plan is erroneous. No one needs insurance until they do. It is impossible to buy it when you actually need it. I am not sure I agree with your assessment of the issue if you do or don't pay for it, but since it seems as if you are damned if you do and damned if you don't, I would pay it or pay more of it than half. Have her contribute what she can. The protective instinct can be a good thing.
posted by JohnnyGunn at 7:17 AM on April 18, 2013 [7 favorites]
posted by JohnnyGunn at 7:17 AM on April 18, 2013 [7 favorites]
so there's no serious medical reason she needs to be insured
That's poor logic... a simple accident could bankrupt her.
My opinion, if she's truly a "partner", help her pay the premium.... It's a sign of love and caring.
posted by HuronBob at 7:17 AM on April 18, 2013 [11 favorites]
That's poor logic... a simple accident could bankrupt her.
My opinion, if she's truly a "partner", help her pay the premium.... It's a sign of love and caring.
posted by HuronBob at 7:17 AM on April 18, 2013 [11 favorites]
That's a lot of money. I believe in being insured, which is why she should look into an individual plan that she can afford.
Just because you're offered an option at work, doesn't mean it's the best option or the only option!
You may find that opting NOT to take the plan offered by your job, that you and your partner can go on the open market and get a plan for the both of you that's more cost effective and suits your needs better.
If you're concerned, perhaps a high deductible plan might be the way to go. You cover your regular medical expenses and this plan only kicks in if something catastrophic happens.
If you're young and healthy this may make WAY more sense for both of you.
posted by Ruthless Bunny at 7:17 AM on April 18, 2013 [6 favorites]
Just because you're offered an option at work, doesn't mean it's the best option or the only option!
You may find that opting NOT to take the plan offered by your job, that you and your partner can go on the open market and get a plan for the both of you that's more cost effective and suits your needs better.
If you're concerned, perhaps a high deductible plan might be the way to go. You cover your regular medical expenses and this plan only kicks in if something catastrophic happens.
If you're young and healthy this may make WAY more sense for both of you.
posted by Ruthless Bunny at 7:17 AM on April 18, 2013 [6 favorites]
Assuming United States. Assuming you are not in a period of non-coverage (uncovered less than 30 or 60 days, I forget). I'd approach it this way - assume for the nonce she will not get massively ill any time soon and get third party inexpensive insurance to get her some coverage and not let her have an insurance gap for now. Blue Cross Blue Shield has really been pushing this in ads and local service centers.
She gets some, if minimal coverage, and avoids the cost of your coverage, and avoids being uinsured (for an issue that could happen right now, and for easier time getting covered later).
Also, weigh pregnancy. I had a choice between nothing, COBRA, or COBRA without pregnancy coverage. I chose COBRA without pregnancy coverage but was VERY CAREFUL.
posted by tilde at 7:18 AM on April 18, 2013
She gets some, if minimal coverage, and avoids the cost of your coverage, and avoids being uinsured (for an issue that could happen right now, and for easier time getting covered later).
Also, weigh pregnancy. I had a choice between nothing, COBRA, or COBRA without pregnancy coverage. I chose COBRA without pregnancy coverage but was VERY CAREFUL.
posted by tilde at 7:18 AM on April 18, 2013
the way you split expenses is, among people I know, already somewhat of an outlier
Agree with this.
If you split expenses in proportion to your disparate incomes, would that free up enough of hers to cover more of the insurance? 50/50 seems a bit punitive to the one with the lower income, although I realize it's tangential to your question.
posted by Sweetie Darling at 7:19 AM on April 18, 2013 [32 favorites]
Agree with this.
If you split expenses in proportion to your disparate incomes, would that free up enough of hers to cover more of the insurance? 50/50 seems a bit punitive to the one with the lower income, although I realize it's tangential to your question.
posted by Sweetie Darling at 7:19 AM on April 18, 2013 [32 favorites]
How about you split costs based on your respective incomes and then she can afford to get her own plan?
posted by elsietheeel at 7:19 AM on April 18, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by elsietheeel at 7:19 AM on April 18, 2013 [4 favorites]
You say she didn't use the plan she was on before. Does that mean she doesn't ever go to the doctor? Even if she is healthy, she should be seeing an OB/GYN annually for preventative care and tests. She should have insurance, IMO.
You say the premium will amount to 10% of your paycheck, but are you accounting for taxes? Most insurance premiums are pretax, pre-FICA even, so this may not take as much of a bite as it first appears.
I agree with some previous commenters that a 50/50 split is not necessarily the best. If it helps you both consider a different allocation, many personal finance experts including Suze Orman advocate splitting bills proportionate to your incomes.
posted by payoto at 7:26 AM on April 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
You say the premium will amount to 10% of your paycheck, but are you accounting for taxes? Most insurance premiums are pretax, pre-FICA even, so this may not take as much of a bite as it first appears.
I agree with some previous commenters that a 50/50 split is not necessarily the best. If it helps you both consider a different allocation, many personal finance experts including Suze Orman advocate splitting bills proportionate to your incomes.
posted by payoto at 7:26 AM on April 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
Could you split the increase in premium instead? So if it cost 100 to cover just you, but 250 to cover both of you, you'd pay 175 and she'd pay 75? (I think, depending on your relationship plan, you might want to reconsider how you split costs -- if you're aiming towards marriage+kids, for instance -- but if it works for you, then it works. That said, the "two completely separate pots" worked really well for my grandparents, until suddenly it didn't and they're in huge financial trouble.)
posted by jeather at 7:28 AM on April 18, 2013
posted by jeather at 7:28 AM on April 18, 2013
There's actually an interesting question about fairness here.
About a year after my partner and I first moved in together, our work situations changed in a way that widened our income disparity. We'd initially split everything 50/50, but after that point we took a step back and thought about alternatives.
We ultimately went through a phase where we each paid the same percentage of our net income (meaning, minus student loan debt payments) towards joint expenses. I really think that saved our relationship, because it resolved our primary source of strain at the time.
(Later still in the course of our relationship, we eventually decided that we just didn't care about the details anymore because we were clearly in it for the long haul, and now he uses my Amazon account and I use his Seamless account habitually, &c.)
It's an ongoing conversation and part of a growing relationship. You should consider talking about alternative ways of structuring your finances together that may be more comfortable for both of you.
posted by 168 at 7:29 AM on April 18, 2013 [6 favorites]
About a year after my partner and I first moved in together, our work situations changed in a way that widened our income disparity. We'd initially split everything 50/50, but after that point we took a step back and thought about alternatives.
We ultimately went through a phase where we each paid the same percentage of our net income (meaning, minus student loan debt payments) towards joint expenses. I really think that saved our relationship, because it resolved our primary source of strain at the time.
(Later still in the course of our relationship, we eventually decided that we just didn't care about the details anymore because we were clearly in it for the long haul, and now he uses my Amazon account and I use his Seamless account habitually, &c.)
It's an ongoing conversation and part of a growing relationship. You should consider talking about alternative ways of structuring your finances together that may be more comfortable for both of you.
posted by 168 at 7:29 AM on April 18, 2013 [6 favorites]
My fear is that, on the one hand, if I did this, I would be supporting her financially, which might change the relationship in ways that we tried to avoid by splitting costs evenly.
This is a less of a thing than you think.
posted by wrok at 7:30 AM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]
This is a less of a thing than you think.
posted by wrok at 7:30 AM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]
Our household's current only option for decent health insurance is outrageously expensive. I cannot afford it. My partner pays. This is largely so that when I get hit by a truck and/or cancer, I don't bankrupt the both of us.
What is the point of a partnership of two people?
posted by RJ Reynolds at 7:32 AM on April 18, 2013 [15 favorites]
What is the point of a partnership of two people?
posted by RJ Reynolds at 7:32 AM on April 18, 2013 [15 favorites]
My husband and I spilt expenses. We don't maintain a joint bank account. There have been times in our relationship where I've carried a bit more of the financial load for him due to a disparity in our incomes, or because I had more liquidity during vacation planning, etc. However, when it's come to insurance, we made it a priority that we were both covered by whichever employer-supported plan was the better deal and adjusted the other expenses accordingly. We're helpmates, not roommates. If you are both young and healthy, I agree with Ruthless Bunny that an independent higher deductible plan maybe a better way to go for you both. If you do go for an independent plan, see if your employer will give you a financial credit for not participating. A past employer did that for us once. A significant medical event without insurance is likely to put much more of a financial and emotional strain on your relationship than covering the insurance premium.
posted by msladygrey at 7:32 AM on April 18, 2013 [5 favorites]
posted by msladygrey at 7:32 AM on April 18, 2013 [5 favorites]
You say the premium will amount to 10% of your paycheck, but are you accounting for taxes? Most insurance premiums are pretax, pre-FICA even, so this may not take as much of a bite as it first appears.
Domestic Partner coverage does not qualify for this tax break. In fact this may RAISE your taxes because the value of her coverage should be included as a part of your income. (Some companies help cover the cost of the taxes but most that do only do it for same sex domestic partners in order to make them equal to couples who can get married).
But totally unrelated to that is my feeling that you MUST have health insurance in the US. Even if you think you can't afford it you MUST have it. A minor accident could cost you thousands before you even blink an eye. What about birth control? Without insurance she is going to have to pay for that, with insurance it is free so factor that cost in (assuming she is on birth control, if not you should probably look into how much is costs to have a baby without insurance, hint: a lot).
posted by magnetsphere at 7:32 AM on April 18, 2013 [7 favorites]
Domestic Partner coverage does not qualify for this tax break. In fact this may RAISE your taxes because the value of her coverage should be included as a part of your income. (Some companies help cover the cost of the taxes but most that do only do it for same sex domestic partners in order to make them equal to couples who can get married).
But totally unrelated to that is my feeling that you MUST have health insurance in the US. Even if you think you can't afford it you MUST have it. A minor accident could cost you thousands before you even blink an eye. What about birth control? Without insurance she is going to have to pay for that, with insurance it is free so factor that cost in (assuming she is on birth control, if not you should probably look into how much is costs to have a baby without insurance, hint: a lot).
posted by magnetsphere at 7:32 AM on April 18, 2013 [7 favorites]
Think what a strain on the relationship it would be if she got hit by a car while crossing the street tomorrow and she was faced with a hundred thousand dollars in medical bills.
Agree with this one.
Besides, everyone should have some kind of medical insurance. Even if you're "healthy" you should be getting basic preventative care. And even healthy people can have accidents.
posted by radioamy at 7:35 AM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]
Agree with this one.
Besides, everyone should have some kind of medical insurance. Even if you're "healthy" you should be getting basic preventative care. And even healthy people can have accidents.
posted by radioamy at 7:35 AM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]
Perhaps the solution would be for her to continue paying what she was paying and could afford, and you pay the balance of the difference. Not because you are supporting her, but because you want to do it for your own peace of mind. It isn't a need of hers that you are fulfilling, but a want of yours.
Another option would be to split the total insurance cost in half. If your coverage is $10 a week and hers is $90, you each pay $50 a week. Remembering that it isn't her insurance that costs a lot, but that yours is subsidized by your employer. They are giving you a "freebie" that shouldn't enter into your personal relationship's discussion of money. or you could opt to frame it like this: your company gives you the perk of subsidized insurance. You will give that perk to her. So she pays the $10 a week, and you pay the $90 a week. By that framing, YOU aren't supporting her against her will, you are just supporting yourself, and letting her have the benefit of a perk you get from work.
It's an ongoing conversation and part of a growing relationship. You should consider talking about alternative ways of structuring your finances together that may be more comfortable for both of you.
I agree. She doesn't want to feel dependent on you, doesn't want her expenses to exceed her earning power, and doesn't want your relationship to be anything but a partnership of equal contributors. But there are lots of ways to look at that besides actual dollars and cents.
Another option would be for her to sacrifice something in exchange for your extra sacrifice of the insurance money. Maybe it would just be symbolic, but if it makes her feel like she is an equal, then it would be worth it to both of you. She could take on some household responsibility that her varied work schedule allows her to do more easily than yours.
posted by gjc at 7:36 AM on April 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
Another option would be to split the total insurance cost in half. If your coverage is $10 a week and hers is $90, you each pay $50 a week. Remembering that it isn't her insurance that costs a lot, but that yours is subsidized by your employer. They are giving you a "freebie" that shouldn't enter into your personal relationship's discussion of money. or you could opt to frame it like this: your company gives you the perk of subsidized insurance. You will give that perk to her. So she pays the $10 a week, and you pay the $90 a week. By that framing, YOU aren't supporting her against her will, you are just supporting yourself, and letting her have the benefit of a perk you get from work.
It's an ongoing conversation and part of a growing relationship. You should consider talking about alternative ways of structuring your finances together that may be more comfortable for both of you.
I agree. She doesn't want to feel dependent on you, doesn't want her expenses to exceed her earning power, and doesn't want your relationship to be anything but a partnership of equal contributors. But there are lots of ways to look at that besides actual dollars and cents.
Another option would be for her to sacrifice something in exchange for your extra sacrifice of the insurance money. Maybe it would just be symbolic, but if it makes her feel like she is an equal, then it would be worth it to both of you. She could take on some household responsibility that her varied work schedule allows her to do more easily than yours.
posted by gjc at 7:36 AM on April 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
A lot of people share expenses proportionately instead of 50/50; you each put say, 50% (or 70%, or 20%, or whatever is needed) into the "shared" household pot for shared expenses, and the rest is your own money. Would that feel equal to you? It would feel more fair and equal to me - and would be no strain on a relationship - but I am, of course, not you.
posted by insectosaurus at 7:43 AM on April 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by insectosaurus at 7:43 AM on April 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
Agreeing with wrok - to do this would be a very small adjustment to how you manage finances together. If you really started supporting her financially in every sense of the word that might change something, but I don't see this having much of an impact if you can both get around the mental hurdle you both seem to be hitting.
Ultimately the "fairness" of how you split expenses comes down to perception. Most of the relationships I've been in have not been totally equitable in terms of how we split costs for multiple reasons: because one of us made more than the other, because there were certain gender roles that we both found enjoyable to enforce and/or balk depending on the circumstance...it's totally up to you and negotiable and no one has to be worried if you communicate and come to an agreement.
It sounds like you want to do this for her. Maybe she just needs reassurance from you that you are ok with it? I'm young (late 20s) but come from the mindset that you don't fuck around with health insurance. Get the most you can afford because care differs significantly on lower tiers and you never know what surprises life has in store. God forbid something happened to her, but if it did, you'd be wishing you had spent this money without blinking an eye.
posted by amycup at 7:45 AM on April 18, 2013
Ultimately the "fairness" of how you split expenses comes down to perception. Most of the relationships I've been in have not been totally equitable in terms of how we split costs for multiple reasons: because one of us made more than the other, because there were certain gender roles that we both found enjoyable to enforce and/or balk depending on the circumstance...it's totally up to you and negotiable and no one has to be worried if you communicate and come to an agreement.
It sounds like you want to do this for her. Maybe she just needs reassurance from you that you are ok with it? I'm young (late 20s) but come from the mindset that you don't fuck around with health insurance. Get the most you can afford because care differs significantly on lower tiers and you never know what surprises life has in store. God forbid something happened to her, but if it did, you'd be wishing you had spent this money without blinking an eye.
posted by amycup at 7:45 AM on April 18, 2013
Am I worrying about this too much?
Yes. This sounds more like a business relationship rather than a romantic one.
But, if that's the way you both want to go - then I agree with others to look into individual health plans and see if there is something more affordable.
posted by KogeLiz at 7:47 AM on April 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
Yes. This sounds more like a business relationship rather than a romantic one.
But, if that's the way you both want to go - then I agree with others to look into individual health plans and see if there is something more affordable.
posted by KogeLiz at 7:47 AM on April 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
I am happy with the way things are.... How can I maintain the status quo here?
You can't. One of the fundamental aspects of existence is change. The horse left the barn when you were offered the new health insurance option. You can't put it back.
Start by acknowledging that things have changed, then figure out what's best.
posted by alms at 7:52 AM on April 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
You can't. One of the fundamental aspects of existence is change. The horse left the barn when you were offered the new health insurance option. You can't put it back.
Start by acknowledging that things have changed, then figure out what's best.
posted by alms at 7:52 AM on April 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
When you say supporting her might change the relationship for the worse, I disagree. Supporting her theoretically changes the relationship by making her dependent on you, "trapping" her due to inability to pay her own bills, right? That doesn't happen here.
If she wanted to leave you she could, and you could stop helping to pay for her health insurance, and she'd be in exactly the foolish position she proposes to stay in right now - uninsured.
posted by treehorn+bunny at 7:52 AM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]
If she wanted to leave you she could, and you could stop helping to pay for her health insurance, and she'd be in exactly the foolish position she proposes to stay in right now - uninsured.
posted by treehorn+bunny at 7:52 AM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]
I think you need to decide how much you like this woman. Is she just a girlfriend who you're living with out of convenience and who you may or may not be with forever (nothing wrong with that, btw) or do you consider her to be your partner for life. If it's the latter, I think you should start thinking of your finances from the point of being a family and do what you need to do/can do to protect your family and its finances.
posted by Jess the Mess at 8:03 AM on April 18, 2013 [9 favorites]
posted by Jess the Mess at 8:03 AM on April 18, 2013 [9 favorites]
And on the other hand, if I don't support her, I feel I am being selfish or cheap, and that might damage the relationship too.
Paying someone's insurance premium isn't supporting them. And if this person is someone you live with, love and have a serious partnership with, then everybody having health cover that protects them from medical bankruptcy is what's in the best interests of the household overall.
she never even used the plan she was on before
That's really really bad logic. Nobody needs insurance until they do. She can eat well and run and be healthy but none of us in control of everything. A burst appendix, a ripped ACL from falling off a bike, a shattered spine from a road traffic accident, cancer - these are all generic and expensive and so much more common than you apparently think they are.
posted by DarlingBri at 8:07 AM on April 18, 2013 [9 favorites]
Paying someone's insurance premium isn't supporting them. And if this person is someone you live with, love and have a serious partnership with, then everybody having health cover that protects them from medical bankruptcy is what's in the best interests of the household overall.
she never even used the plan she was on before
That's really really bad logic. Nobody needs insurance until they do. She can eat well and run and be healthy but none of us in control of everything. A burst appendix, a ripped ACL from falling off a bike, a shattered spine from a road traffic accident, cancer - these are all generic and expensive and so much more common than you apparently think they are.
posted by DarlingBri at 8:07 AM on April 18, 2013 [9 favorites]
Pay it and don't bring it up or make her feel shitty about it. Those are the only ways that this "disparity" could go wrong.
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 8:28 AM on April 18, 2013 [9 favorites]
posted by PhoBWanKenobi at 8:28 AM on April 18, 2013 [9 favorites]
I think if you expanded on exactly what you hoped to avoid by splitting expenses 50/50 you could get more targeted responses to your situation to maintain the status quo or to get you to rethink things so that you both still feel comfortable.
For example you say you feel it would be selfish to not support her, but selfishness has many forms other than 'wanting to save money'. If my long-term partner was uninsured and I can insure them myself, I'd do it... out of selfishness! If someone I love isn't insured I'd worry constantly about them and wonder how it would affect our relationship if they couldn't afford medical bills. Paying for them for my own peace of mind is a gift to myself that also benefits my partner.
I'm not saying you have to do things this way, but being fair and avoiding dependency is more complicated than just both people paying 50/50 into a relationship. If she loses her job are you supposed to break up with her to avoid making her dependant on you? Or if you lose your job will she dump you? Have you talked to each other seriously about what happens if circumstances beyond your control changes the dynamic for you?
Basically, what I'm saying is if you're willing to support each other if catastrophy strikes then you're already dependant on each other in a more real sense than if one of you pays more of the bills than the other.
posted by Green With You at 8:44 AM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]
For example you say you feel it would be selfish to not support her, but selfishness has many forms other than 'wanting to save money'. If my long-term partner was uninsured and I can insure them myself, I'd do it... out of selfishness! If someone I love isn't insured I'd worry constantly about them and wonder how it would affect our relationship if they couldn't afford medical bills. Paying for them for my own peace of mind is a gift to myself that also benefits my partner.
I'm not saying you have to do things this way, but being fair and avoiding dependency is more complicated than just both people paying 50/50 into a relationship. If she loses her job are you supposed to break up with her to avoid making her dependant on you? Or if you lose your job will she dump you? Have you talked to each other seriously about what happens if circumstances beyond your control changes the dynamic for you?
Basically, what I'm saying is if you're willing to support each other if catastrophy strikes then you're already dependant on each other in a more real sense than if one of you pays more of the bills than the other.
posted by Green With You at 8:44 AM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]
You and your partner seem to have a benevolent roommate situation. If you aren't willing to cover what she can't afford, it seems to indicate you don't consider her a long term partner or your family. It's kind of telling.
posted by discopolo at 9:04 AM on April 18, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by discopolo at 9:04 AM on April 18, 2013 [3 favorites]
If you lost your job, would she buy you food and work to keep a roof over your head?
If you answer is yes, I believe that answers your question. Pay for the insurance.
posted by BlueJae at 9:06 AM on April 18, 2013 [5 favorites]
If you answer is yes, I believe that answers your question. Pay for the insurance.
posted by BlueJae at 9:06 AM on April 18, 2013 [5 favorites]
Are you in the US? Nthing that everyone in the US needs insurance if they can get it. So your partner should get on your insurance or buy high-deductible individual coverage ASAP, however you decide to split the bill. Under the Affordable Care Act, your partner can start shopping for insurance via the insurance exchanges in October 2013, which may or may not be cheaper than your employer plan. Coverage will start January 1, 2014. She'll need to get coverage anyway by January 2014 or pay the penalty for remaining uncovered. (All assuming US OP.)
posted by ClaudiaCenter at 9:10 AM on April 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by ClaudiaCenter at 9:10 AM on April 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
Is this your only insurance option? If yes, just do it. If not, find something you can both afford. This seems to me like a bigger issue than just the insurance is bothering you, is that the case?
posted by windykites at 9:39 AM on April 18, 2013
posted by windykites at 9:39 AM on April 18, 2013
About a year and a half ago, I had to take my son to the emergency room for croup, which is about the lowest-cost-of-treatment thing that is actually a for-real emergency. If we hadn't had insurance, we would have been on the hook for nearly $5K in costs. My sister-in-law had a freak complication of a normal ovulation (yes, really; the corpus luteum ruptured a tiny artery when it burst) and ended up in the ER needing emergency abdominal surgery, to a total cost of $80,000. A good friend of mine went, reluctantly, to the ER because his wife noticed he was jaundiced and had a swollen abdomen; eight months later, after 6 months on life support and a liver transplant, his pre-insurance medical costs came to nearly three million dollars.
You have to have insurance. In a partnership like this, you each support each other with your strengths; one of your strengths is your extra income. Pay it for her and don't be weird.
posted by KathrynT at 9:46 AM on April 18, 2013 [9 favorites]
You have to have insurance. In a partnership like this, you each support each other with your strengths; one of your strengths is your extra income. Pay it for her and don't be weird.
posted by KathrynT at 9:46 AM on April 18, 2013 [9 favorites]
We are both young and healthy so there's no serious medical reason she needs to be insured
I was 33 when I was diagnosed with kidney cancer. No previous reason to believe I'd ever need massive health coverage. My simple cancer (no chemo) cost more than half a million dollars to date.
Every one needs insurance. Every one.
posted by SuzySmith at 9:55 AM on April 18, 2013 [6 favorites]
no serious medical reason she needs to be insured
I have a friend who broke his neck in an accident in his 30s. He is alive and has the use of all his limbs thanks to seven figures worth of medical care. He had only very limited insurance at the time and will be paying off the (negotiated) medical bills for the rest of his life.
Just put her on your plan.
posted by scody at 10:43 AM on April 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
I have a friend who broke his neck in an accident in his 30s. He is alive and has the use of all his limbs thanks to seven figures worth of medical care. He had only very limited insurance at the time and will be paying off the (negotiated) medical bills for the rest of his life.
Just put her on your plan.
posted by scody at 10:43 AM on April 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
no serious medical reason she needs to be insured
I was hit by a car after an 80 year old WWII vet had a medical event and ran a stop sign.
As someone who is in a relationship where there is a big BIG income disparity, all I can say is that you're treating this far more like a business decision than like you and your partner are making yourselves into a family. If there is a big income disparity, it is much more common to cover expenses proportional to income vs. splitting 50/50.
I wonder if the issue isn't the money itself, but rather the responsibility -- by paying, you would be making more of a commitment to her (and your family together) than you have up until now.
posted by anastasiav at 11:09 AM on April 18, 2013 [7 favorites]
I was hit by a car after an 80 year old WWII vet had a medical event and ran a stop sign.
As someone who is in a relationship where there is a big BIG income disparity, all I can say is that you're treating this far more like a business decision than like you and your partner are making yourselves into a family. If there is a big income disparity, it is much more common to cover expenses proportional to income vs. splitting 50/50.
I wonder if the issue isn't the money itself, but rather the responsibility -- by paying, you would be making more of a commitment to her (and your family together) than you have up until now.
posted by anastasiav at 11:09 AM on April 18, 2013 [7 favorites]
We are both young and healthy so there's no serious medical reason she needs to be insured
This is CRAZY. Everyone needs at least a high deductible plan.
(in fact, she never even used the plan she was on before)
That's not how insurance works.
Stop counting beans and take care of the person you love.
posted by ablazingsaddle at 11:49 AM on April 18, 2013 [3 favorites]
This is CRAZY. Everyone needs at least a high deductible plan.
(in fact, she never even used the plan she was on before)
That's not how insurance works.
Stop counting beans and take care of the person you love.
posted by ablazingsaddle at 11:49 AM on April 18, 2013 [3 favorites]
IF she lost her income and you would happily support her until she got another job, I think you should pay. If she gets a job with higher income in the future, you can always revisit the idea of her paying half.
Also, you need health insurance. I ended up in the hospital for an unidenified illness when I was 25. It cost $49,000 for a week in the hospital. I was completely healthy before and have been since. unexpected health issues are the real American boogeyman.
posted by WeekendJen at 12:49 PM on April 18, 2013
Also, you need health insurance. I ended up in the hospital for an unidenified illness when I was 25. It cost $49,000 for a week in the hospital. I was completely healthy before and have been since. unexpected health issues are the real American boogeyman.
posted by WeekendJen at 12:49 PM on April 18, 2013
Are you sure splitting things 50/50 is fair? I had a long term relationship where we lived together and I made significantly more than she did though we both worked 40 to 50 hours a week. We didn't split bills 50/50 since $500 a month was far more expensive to her than it was to me.
ablazingsaddle said: "Stop counting beans and take care of the person you love."
THIS.
posted by 2oh1 at 1:03 PM on April 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
ablazingsaddle said: "Stop counting beans and take care of the person you love."
THIS.
posted by 2oh1 at 1:03 PM on April 18, 2013 [2 favorites]
Okay, I am going to frame this in a slightly different way. I agree your partner should be insured. I agree you can work out a plan.
- Do you completely share 50% of the housework, grocery shopping, dishes, space? Probably not. Therefore unless you have worked on your 50/50 with razor precision, there are probably things that she does more often than you, and the other way around.
-no serious medical reason she needs to be insured
People keep talking about car accidents and cancer. YES you need insurance to cover these, but also think about this. What about something small and routine, like a walk-in visit for a UTI (Urinary Tract Infection), Strep Throat, or even a dental cleaning or cavity? Even bad dental insurance usually covers cleanings.
Your insurance could basically be paid for in a month if you just have to go into the walk-in to get a wart removed sometimes. Obviously this depends on your co-pay and the price of the walk-in. But still, you can't also say when routine sickness will happen that needs attention.
-Back to, What if something serious happens: One of my favorite comedians, Maria Bamford, didn't have insurance and shares this story on stage (sorry, language.)
"I went to a crappy, shitty, no-good free clinic, and got some crappy, shitty, no-good free medicine, then had a crappy, shitty, no-good $5,000 allergic reaction."
Something routine can turn into an emergency too, so if you think you are "okay" with spending the money out of pocket for a walk in, you may want to think again. In the end, it's what, a couple hundred dollars? Talk with your partner and figure it out.
posted by Crystalinne at 1:17 PM on April 18, 2013
- Do you completely share 50% of the housework, grocery shopping, dishes, space? Probably not. Therefore unless you have worked on your 50/50 with razor precision, there are probably things that she does more often than you, and the other way around.
-no serious medical reason she needs to be insured
People keep talking about car accidents and cancer. YES you need insurance to cover these, but also think about this. What about something small and routine, like a walk-in visit for a UTI (Urinary Tract Infection), Strep Throat, or even a dental cleaning or cavity? Even bad dental insurance usually covers cleanings.
Your insurance could basically be paid for in a month if you just have to go into the walk-in to get a wart removed sometimes. Obviously this depends on your co-pay and the price of the walk-in. But still, you can't also say when routine sickness will happen that needs attention.
-Back to, What if something serious happens: One of my favorite comedians, Maria Bamford, didn't have insurance and shares this story on stage (sorry, language.)
"I went to a crappy, shitty, no-good free clinic, and got some crappy, shitty, no-good free medicine, then had a crappy, shitty, no-good $5,000 allergic reaction."
Something routine can turn into an emergency too, so if you think you are "okay" with spending the money out of pocket for a walk in, you may want to think again. In the end, it's what, a couple hundred dollars? Talk with your partner and figure it out.
posted by Crystalinne at 1:17 PM on April 18, 2013
People keep talking about car accidents and cancer. YES you need insurance to cover these, but also think about this. What about something small and routine, like a walk-in visit for a UTI (Urinary Tract Infection), Strep Throat, or even a dental cleaning or cavity? Even bad dental insurance usually covers cleanings.
Yes. I spent a lot of money on a UTI a few years ago. And I had another incident when a small piece of industrial dust (metal, maybe) got in my eye, eye got irritated, and then infected. Not a big deal, but very expensive and not something was going to fix itself. None of this sent me into thousands and thousands of dollars of debt, but paying almost $300 to have an Optometrist pull a tiny shard of something out of your eye sucks. Paying for labwork out of pocket on something as stupid and common as UTI also sucks.
posted by ablazingsaddle at 1:39 PM on April 18, 2013
Yes. I spent a lot of money on a UTI a few years ago. And I had another incident when a small piece of industrial dust (metal, maybe) got in my eye, eye got irritated, and then infected. Not a big deal, but very expensive and not something was going to fix itself. None of this sent me into thousands and thousands of dollars of debt, but paying almost $300 to have an Optometrist pull a tiny shard of something out of your eye sucks. Paying for labwork out of pocket on something as stupid and common as UTI also sucks.
posted by ablazingsaddle at 1:39 PM on April 18, 2013
It's not just that a medical emergency could bankrupt her, it's also that she may be far worse off due to lack of access to good care if she does have a medical problem.
I know that people do relationship finances differently, but if I were in your position, I would add her without hesitation for my own peace of mind and I wouldn't' make a big deal of it. If you have a income disparity and you can afford to take this opportunity to create a safeguard for her, I don't know why you wouldn't. Splitting things 50/50 does not shield you from relationship challenges. Don't act like it's a magical shield that keeps everything in balance. Part of loving someone is doing what you can to make sure that they're safe and happy. Do that.
posted by quince at 2:02 PM on April 18, 2013
I know that people do relationship finances differently, but if I were in your position, I would add her without hesitation for my own peace of mind and I wouldn't' make a big deal of it. If you have a income disparity and you can afford to take this opportunity to create a safeguard for her, I don't know why you wouldn't. Splitting things 50/50 does not shield you from relationship challenges. Don't act like it's a magical shield that keeps everything in balance. Part of loving someone is doing what you can to make sure that they're safe and happy. Do that.
posted by quince at 2:02 PM on April 18, 2013
What if she did get sick down the road (appendix, say) and had to be off work and had big medical bills? Would you toss her to the curb or would you take on greater financial responsibility while she got back on her feet? If you would chip in for the later scenario, why not just chip in now? It's probably a *better* deal for you financially, actually.
posted by ThatCanadianGirl at 5:34 PM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by ThatCanadianGirl at 5:34 PM on April 18, 2013 [1 favorite]
This thread is closed to new comments.
Think what a strain on the relationship it would be if she got hit by a car while crossing the street tomorrow and she was faced with a hundred thousand dollars in medical bills.
Honestly, I understand why you don't feel totally comfortable with this, but the way you split expenses is, among people I know, already somewhat of an outlier.
posted by showbiz_liz at 7:16 AM on April 18, 2013 [46 favorites]