Divorce Insurance: Get Unhitched, Get a Pay-Out

[seabeyond]

this is just sad.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2015772,00.html?hpt=C2


Ever had that sinking feeling that the person your friend is marrying is perfectly awful? Of course not, because you love everyone. But should it happen, you now can give the perfect wedding present: divorce insurance.

WedLock, as it's coyly named, is a new type of casualty insurance that gives the unhappily married policyholder a payout after he or she is unhitched. It costs about $16 a month for every $1,250 of coverage. But to discourage people from signing up just prior to their divorce, policyholders must ante up for four years before the policy will pay out. It adds a premium of $250 per unit for every year the marriage survives beyond four. So if a policyholder who bought 10 units got divorced after 10 years, he or she would have handed over $19,188 and would receive a payout of $27,500. It's probably not worth getting divorced for, but the lump sum might salve some wounds, whether through lawyers, vacations or subscriptions to the Rhapsody Book Club.
(See five Facebook no-nos for divorcing couples.)

The idea bubbled up, as so many do, from the bottom of a financial pit. After John Logan watched his wealth follow his marriage down the drain, the Kernersville, N.C., entrepreneur figured there must be a market for those who want to hedge their marital bets. He won't reveal how many policies he's sold since the Aug. 5 launch of WedLockDivorceInsurance.com But he's surprised at how much insurance his customers are buying: some of the premiums are more than $1,000 a month.

Not everybody thinks divorce insurance is prudent. "The best insurance against a painful, financially devastating divorce is to find a way to be happy in your marriage," says relationship coach Mimi Daniel. "Divorce insurance implies from the beginning that divorce is already an option."



Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2015772,00.html?hpt=C2#ixzz102j22BlQ

[DJ13]

1. That sounds like a rife opportunity for fraud

Get married, take out insurance, stay together long enough to satisfy the policy restrictions, get divorced and pocket the money.

I could even see couples that wouldnt otherwise divorce doing it for the money.

[seabeyond]

2. couples that wouldnt otherwise divorce doing it for the money.

ya

[joshcryer]

6. 50% percent of first marriages, 67% of second and 74% of third marriages end in divorce

[seabeyond]

11. i heard 41% first marriages and then the rest of your numbers. nt

[seabeyond]

12. two different studies, two different numbers....

50% percent of first marriages, 67% of second and 74% of third marriages end in divorce, according to Jennifer Baker of the Forest Institute of Professional Psychology in Springfield, Missouri.

According to enrichment journal on the divorce rate in America:

The divorce rate in America for first marriage is 41%

The divorce rate in America for second marriage is 60%

The divorce rate in America for third marriage is 73%



Read more: High Point Enterprise - HAILEY HENDRIX Adultery’s explosion makes mockery of marriage

http://www.divorcerate.org/

[EFerrari]

3. People are devastated financially in divorces. I think this is a great idea.

I could have used it, that's for sure. And not to buy a subscription to a dating service but to make ends meet while you restabilize your life.

[laundry_queen]

5. exactly.

I think a lot of people don't understand how expensive a divorce can be. I sure could have used it as well. Sadly, I probably would never have bought it because divorce, for me, was not an option. Unfortunately, it was for my ex and I didn't get a say. Financially it's hard on both of us right now, and the kids do suffer because of a lack of funds that they used to have. Maybe if this catches on, it will just become routine for newly married people. With the divorce rate, though, I'm not sure how viable this business plan is.

[JVS]

4. Wouldn't such insurance encourage high-risk marital behavior?

[EFerrari]

8. Depending on how it was structured, it might discourage high risk behavior.

Sort of like auto insurance.

[Common Sense Party]

9. Just like my homeowner's insurance encourages me to barbecue in bed.

[leftstreet]

10. lol

:spray:

[napi21]

7. This sounds awful to me. If you were just married or planning your weddnig &

and your fiance decided to get a divorce ins. policy, that would sure turn me off! It sounds like at least one party isn't planning on makig a life long commitemnt to the relationship! Besides, it's not eally enough money to make that great of a difference! PLUS most couples who are in tight financial straights don't have $1,900 a year to spend on ins.

[Common Sense Party]

13. How do you feel about prenuptial agreements?

This is in the same ballpark.

And just as with prenups, I think this is mostly going to appeal to those people with high net worths (and low fidelity).

[napi21]

14. I do't have a problem with prenups because I feel if I would

have ever been in a situation to even consider one (I wouldn't have been the one with the $$!) I would see that as an afirmaton of my love and not just looking for money. I honestly don't see the corelation between a prenup & divorce ins. Maybe there should be some anti divorce ins that pays a mice sum after a couple has been married for 20+ years? Sounds like abetter idea to me!

[Common Sense Party]

15. "It sounds like at least one party isn't planning on makig a life long commitemnt to the

relationship"

That's the correlation between the two.

BTW, I wouldn't pay ANY sum to mice. They're shifty. :-)

[MadHound]

16. It would be interesting to see the fine print on this

If it as poorly structured as this article makes it seem, this is a perfect way to plunder insurance companies.

[Gin]

17. does the insured have to be one of the married partners? or

can we buy insurance on other people like wall street did knowing the marriage will collapse

[Book Lover]

18. Great idea and every woman should get some as a shower present (nm)