Health insurance - to have or not to have???

[black_rose]

I have hospital and extras, the hospital cover I have needed twice this year and without it I would probably still be waiting and be very sick by now. Our extras have been worth it as dd1 needs glasses and has had to change them twice this year and we have used it for dental, physio and Chiro too.

[AnyDream]

ETA - forgot to mention that being without PHI meant I had to wait about 4 months of excruciating gallstone attacks before i could get the sucker seen to. Not nice.

Extras - have always kept top extras - you only need a pair of glasses and a little bit of dental each year and it pays for itself.

[Olive]

we have basic hopital ($74 a month for the family) and we've used it once for DD's grommets, once already for me this year and will again next month when i have surgery, without id still be waiting! its worth it, maybe find a cheaper fund

[Trillian]

We were always of the view that we didn't need it - we were healthy people who don't use doctors a lot and we were in the financial position that if we needed anything, then we had the money to just pay to go private anyway. But then we had kids. Kids who need glasses (and now I need them too!), kids who need a truckload of dental work (2 kids with crap teeth), kids who play football and need mouthguards, kids who need chiropractic (and DH and I need it too), a DH with worn out knees that needed fixing, me with endo problems that needed fixing and the PHI has been a GODSEND! We only got it because DH's work pays for it as a fringe benefit but even once he leaves there we will continue to keep the PHI because you can't afford to be without it these days. the health system is that crappy that even if you are a priority 1 public patient where you need immediate treatment, you are still better off with PHI because it gives you more choices in how you want your treatment handled and not just hoping the hospital lottery pays off.

So it's not always a financial benefit that you will get from it, but it is more of the type of treatment you get and the time it takes you to get it. Some people still have a lot of faith in the public system and in some cases there is little or no difference between public and private - or in the case of maternity services public is far better - but I want the choice, I want to know that I'm able to acess health services quickly if I need it. When I had my endo problems, I saw my GP, saw the gyno 2wks later and had the op 4 weeks after that - 6 weeks was all it took! When I was a lot younger and had the same op done, it took nearly 9 months from seeing the GP for a referral to having it done publically. Even with DH's knees, if he went public, he would be looking at a 2+ year wait, but it only took him 8 weeks with PHI.

I know it is hard to visualise the benefits when all you see is the premium being paid out each month, but it is like that with any insurance - seems pointless to have it when you never make a claim, but if you have to use it for something really substancial, then it immediately pays for itself.

[Jellyfish]

So far it has been worth it for us (family hospital and extras) having both my babies privately and now that my DD has speech issues. I also have glasses for driving (watching movies and such too) and dental is the big one, I had to have a wisdom tooth out after DD and I can't imagine having to wait in pain, letting the situation get worse (it had just come through and was pushing my other teeth) because of not being able to afford getting something done.

I think Trillian said it well.. it is more than the financial thing, it is about the security of getting something done with choices and speed.

[LizLemon]

I agree with what the others said - sometimes it's worth having in the event something goes wrong. At the very least hospital.

Re the tax time financial advantage - PHI will only help avoid the medicare levy surcharge (and if you earn under a certain amount you wouldn't have to pay this anyway), it does not reduce your medicare levy, which is a flat rate of earnings. It's shoddy advertising really, they make it seem like it will save everyone by having PHI but it will only save those earning over a certain amount.

[*EJ*]

Re the tax time financial advantage - PHI will only help avoid the medicare levy surcharge (and if you earn under a certain amount you wouldn't have to pay this anyway), it does not reduce your medicare levy, which is a flat rate of earnings. It's shoddy advertising really, they make it seem like it will save everyone by having PHI but it will only save those earning over a certain amount.

Absolutely is shoddy advertising!!!! But at the same time a good argument for me with my DH and pursuading him to keep it going

[Olive]

there is a government website like iselect, that's where i found my fund, i only have basic cover

[Cranky Kitten]

If anything with kids I'd keep the extras and maybe reduce or change the hospital cover. And yes, some funds will do an extras-only policy. DD is staring down the barrel of braces/orthodontic work once her adult teeth finish coming through if they don't straighten up on their own, DH and I both wear glasses and I see a chiro every 2 weeks. Plus I only paid about $50 out of pocket for my last extraction (ouch) rather than the $200 it should've been.

We're with HBF which is a WA based insurer and have both health and car insurance with them through salary sacrifice with DH's work - definitely a better deal than paying directly, maybe check with your DH's employer to see if this is an option for you?