Insurers should ask the same lifestyle questions to all applicants, regardless of their sexuality, says Phil Carvosso
The life assurance industry should hold its head in shame at how it treats the gay community in the UK. The lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community accounts for approximately 10% of the population. By default the gay and bisexual community will equate to approximately 7% of the population. This is a huge number of individuals and a huge market for any insurer to accommodate.
With the disbanding of the impaired lives register, the problems faced by the community when obtaining non-discriminatory life assurance have got worse. Most insurers now ask lifestyle questions on the proposal form as a matter of course. All insurers will issue the lifestyle questionnaire at some level of cover.
It is understandable why questions are asked regarding haemophiliacs. The McFarlens Trust acknowledges that haemophiliacs may be infected not only with HIV if they are over 16, but also by Hepatitis C or CJD. They are born with this condition and may have become infected due to poor blood screening procedures.
But according to the industry, gay men are also born with a condition ' apparently giving the insurer an automatic right to discriminate. HIV is the only reason why gay men are singled out and yet they are acknowledged as experts in practising safe sex. Last year, there were around 450 deaths in the UK from AIDS-related diseases. According to medical experts, this figure is set to reduce to 350 this year. As a percentage of the population, this is just 0.00058%.
Underwriters are worried about selection. But there are ways of underwriting without unnecessary discrimination which will satisfy and protect the policyholder.
Instead of asking about sexual orientation, why not ask pertinent questions across the board that will enhance protection of profits by identifying those who are actively putting themselves at risk to HIV infection. For example, ask whether people have had unprotected sexual intercourse within the past five years, or if they are in a long-term relationship and whether they have had unprotected sexual intercourse outside of that relationship.
If someone is putting themselves at risk, insurers need to cover themselves in a correct and proper manner. The industry continues to intrude without analysing the facts or the reasons why it asks questions.
The Disability Act also has implications for underwriting gay and bisexual men. Can the industry justify loading the premiums of two gay men who have lived together for five years and have tested negative for HIV and passed the medical with flying colours? A lot of underwriters do.
Why not save the £45 testing expenses and donate it to the Terrence Higgins Trust? By helping with the education of HIV prevention, everyone wins. Fewer infections mean fewer deaths and better underwriting profits. Despite working to change the terrible discrimination faced by the gay community, the industry remains as bigoted and unbending as ever.
