Here's the issue with any type of variable universal life policy - the agent's premium and company fees can be set up different ways. Surprise, surprise - the default on running a customer quote is set to the agent/company advantage, NOT the consumer. You can get them to change this - BUT you have to ASK. The agent should be willing to do this, but very few of them will volunteer (not surprisingly). This is a hybrid policy currently very "hot" in insurance circles because so many people think they might be "wasting" their premium dollars. Needless to say, you will pay more for such a hybrid policy, than you would if you just bought level term life insurance and a standard LTC policy. Unless you seriously need life insurance for estate reasons - I have it, but for a very specific reason - I can't see why anyone would buy these types of policies. You pay for auto insurance and homeowners insurance for years, with most people never making any serious claims. Is that money wasted? No - it is intended to mitigate risk in an emergency. LTC insurance is no different. If your life expectancy factors are good, you want to age "in place", and you can't afford to self-insure, then buying an LTC policy can help mitigate the risk of running out of money and being forced into only Medicaid facilities, rather than having a variety of choices open to you. LTC insurance is not for everyone, and there are many policy details needing prudent and careful review. It may indeed be true that a hybrid policy would work well for you...but I would carefully compare it with the standard policy and a level term life quote before making any decision. Good luck to you and others going forward. This is not an easy or simple decision to make. You will need the help of an ethical insurance salesman, and that's something you will need to find on your own. They do exist, so start searching and asking lots of questions.

Smart Money magazine published an article several years ago that argued against buying LTC in your 50s or earlier because the standard 5% inflation protection coverage would not keep up with the average 7% increase in nursing home costs. Basically, the earlier you buy the policy, the larger the gap that you will have between what your policy pays out and what the actual costs will be. Here are a couple of quotes from the article: "The 5% inflation adjustment is the industry standard, adopted by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) in the early 1990s. If the insurance industry were to adopt the 7% inflation figure that some predict, 'the cost would be prohibitive', says Tom Foley, an actuary with the North Dakota Insurance Department who chairs the NAIC's long-term care rate stabilization woking group." "The average age at which people buy long-term-care insurance is now about 65, and given the effects of inflation on your coverage, not to mention the uncertainty of health care costs and public policy 20 or 30 years from now, why buy it earlier than that? 'If there's a liklihood you might develop a health problem that makes long-term-care insurance expensive, you might want to buy it sooner', says Chuck Mondin of the United Seniors Health Cooperative, a nonprofit advocacy group. Otherwise, wait."

We bought LTCI last year at the ages of 49 and 51, and we're glad we did. I did not go into this with eyes half shut. I did uncountable hours of research, attended seminars, talked to people, interviewed agents, etc. I'm the type of person who doesn't allow anyone to talk me into anything - period. We bought a great policy through an A++ rated company, John Hancock. The average age one should buy LTC is 60ish - before health problems begin and the premiums are outrageous if you can even get it with certain conditions. I wasn't waiting 10 years to do so especially since our premiums would double by then even if we remain healthy...but who knows how our health will be in 10 years. Sure, we're healthy now and healthier than our parents were at this age, but no one has a crystal ball to determine how our health and at what age, will affect us. I'm not taking chances knowing DH's parents history. We have no kids or family that will care for us should we need it now or later, and to put 100% burden on the other spouse isn't fair, IMO. And even if we did have kids, who's to say they would want to interrupt their lives to care for sick parents. As cruel as this sounds, I prefer not to care for my mother as she's a difficult one now and she's relatively healthy. This LTC is piece of mind for us. While humans are living longer these days, from my research, it states that a very high percentage of people will require some kind of nursing home facility and the average time is 2.5 years. Should that time come now or later, the insurance is already there to be used. If we were to invest $$ for a rainy day to use toward this, it will take A VERY LONG TIME to match what insurance money is available to us NOW. We hope to never have to use it, but good to know it's in place if we have to, and we're lucky enough to be able to afford it. I realize many cannot. There's much to know about the various companies offering this including their ratings, how their policies work with the options & riders offered, claims stats, etc., and then choosing what is right for each individual. While most people tend to not think about LTC or discount it all together, I really think more people should learn about it and give it serious consideration. (No, I don't sell it). Frankly, IMHO, your sister is wise in thinking about her elder years that way.

Alisande, the concern I have about not having children is that there will be no kids around to help take care of us if and when we get old. DH and I both helped our parents a lot in their later years which helped 2 out of 3 of them live in their own home until they passed away in their mid-80s. Of course there's no guarantee even if you do have kids that they will be willing or able to help you out when you are older but if you have none you KNOW they won't. My father died in his early 60s of heart disease - that could happen to me too of course. My LTC plan returns all the $ paid if I kick the bucket before age 65 and a portion of if I die before 75. Here are some other reasons I chose to go with the LTC insurance - along with the fact I'm pretty much of a planner by nature vs. someone who would just let the chips fall where they may as you say. Philosophically, DH and I want to take responsibility for our own care if at all possible rather than planning for taxpayers to fund our long term care through Medicaid. If we ultimately cannot afford our own care we will at least know we did our best to try to provide for ourselves. I know once I retire I'm going to be nervous about running out of money before I die. LTC insurance gives me some peace of mind about that, knowing that I would not be paying out of pocket to get help in my home if and when I need it. And I do want help in my home if possible rather than having to go to a nursing home - which is currently the requirement if your care is paid for by Medicaid. I have a lot of friends whose parents have been diagnosed with dementia/Alzheimers - some at a fairly young age. These folks are needing YEARS of LTC. The thought of this happening to one of us is very disconcerting - leaving the other person spending an exorbitant amount of money for care of the spouse - possibly not having enough left for their own needs. So we shall see what happens. I know I would not be able to get coverage on the open market if I hadn't had the open enrollment through my employer. I can afford the coverage now and hopefully will be able to in the future as well. Whatever the case at least I have all my options open at this point. If I had not signed up I may never have had the chance to get coverage again in the future. It is insurance though - and as such could be lots of money spent on something that's never used. If you live to a ripe old age and that's the case then that's a pretty good outcome in my opinion as long as the LTC coverage doesn't leave you "insurance poor".