On Wednesday, i had a class of Law and Economics (a subject that is irrelevant to my research topic but i chose to take it anyway), a professor asked: "there is a life insurance why not a marriage insurance?." Marriage insurance here means you will get a reimbursement from insurance company upon divorce. Some students said if there were a marriage insurance, there would be a motivation/encouragment for divorce. People would break up in order to get money. Some said it's immoral to have this kind of insurance. To me, i think the company may find it hard to measure and calculate premium for love. It may be hard to find out when love of each party ends while life of a person can be estimated. For example, life expectancy of Cambodian people is around 50 years old. So what is your idea about it?
2 comments:
First let me say that I'd like you to put me in touch with your professor.
Now, let's address some of the commentary.
"Some students said if there were a marriage insurance, there would be a motivation/encouragment for divorce. People would break up in order to get money."
While there may be some basis for abuse if the insurance simply paid people to divorce, such a statement is not realistic. Most insurance programs are designed to "make [the policy holder] whole again" or more simply, reimburse them for money lost. The Student's statement above does not take into account that divorce is a time consuming, often painful and costly occurrence that, on average, depletes both parties net worth well beyond the common wisdom of 50%. People are no more likely to divorce as a result of a marriage insurance purchase than they are to purposefully wreck their car to collect their auto insurance or break their own leg to collect disability insurance. Does it ever happen? Yes, but it's the exception, not the norm.
"Some said it's immoral to have this kind of insurance."
Religious convictions aside, is it immoral for a third party to provide a financial safety net for the tens of thousands of children whose parents fall below the poverty line as a result of divorce? Is it immoral to provide people who, through no fault of their own, are left homeless and insolvent with the dignity and ability to restart their lives? I think not.
"To me, i think the company may find it hard to measure and calculate premium for love."
Quite frankly, love has nothing to do with it. A marriage is a bond, a contract between two people and while love may have brought them together, just as a common interest adjoins many business partners, there are aspects to marriage that should be rightfully treated as a bond, beyond the spoken vows and kisses. If people have legal rights within a marriage, than insurable interest not just in the life of the spouse but in the marriage itself is an integral part of that.
I suggest you visit www.safeguardguaranty.com to find out more and do feel free to contact me directly at john.logan@safeguardguaranty.com if you'd like to discuss the subject further.
- John Logan
Hi John,
First, i would like to thank you for your comments on this issue. Regarding your proposal in contacting with my professor, i don't have a response on that yet as i will have to let him know first.
Second, we were just discussing the topic in class and i thought it's kind of interesting. Therefore, i posted on the blog to get other people's idea. Now, i know that you initiate this kind of insurance, which i think is good as you are able to find good points to support it. As you may know, there are always 2 sides of a thing. If you can prove that the insurance brings more good than bad, then I believe you will have a successful business.
Finally, thanks again for offering me further information re marriage insurance and wish you all the best for your initiative.
Best-Kanha
P.S: I learned quite a lot from you web-site. [smiling] And, I sure will write to you for more inquiries esp. on marriage contract matter.
Post a Comment