but when I bought insurance for my daughter when she was 7, it was for two purposes: If she should become ill and die, it would pay for final medical expenses and a funeral. We didn't have very much money and a catastrophic illness and death would have meant bankruptcy and probably a loss of our home, but at $10.43 a month, we were protected against that. And, should she live to adulthood (which she has) it converted to a policy with a larger amount (with no change in premium) which would be enough to cover final expenses and funeral. Neither policy was very big. I never thought of it as an "investment" or something I would make a profit on.

I guess I would be more suspicious of motives if the policies were high-figure amounts. Or maybe I watch too much TV.

especially for those that can't afford a full funeral. The premiums would be low and the parents are not sattled with funeral expenses if that becomes a reality. However, anything over that and I think some suspicion needs to be addressed.

I can asssure you I hope to never cash it in.

It's through my wife's employer, and it is around the cost of a cup of coffee per month.

I remember my mother saying this was common practice during the Depression and that the 'insurance agent' would make his weekly rounds (It was the Depression, remember, as a few pennies a week might not be that hurtful, to some and by the time the now common practice of monthly, if not quarterly or yearly premium payments and a month's premium came around the now dollars or more might have been too precious to keep the policy in force.

Large companies' practice of insuring their workers' against their deaths seems to be common practice now and it seems to be a net positive way to 'help the bottom line'.

The downstream posts seem to reflect this thinking also and I'd be very suspicious of a middle class couple taking out a $100,000 policy, or more, on their young child (it would help THEIR bottom line in case of the child's death).

Now THAT'S sick.

My grandfather, who rarely had two nickles to rub together, took out insurance policies on all of his grandchildren at birth. They were small policies - I believe the premiums were less than a dollar a month per. The payout was a few hundred dollars, and our parents were the beneficiaries.

The idea was that if a child died, the parents would not have the financial burden of funeral expenses to deal with. My grandparents lost a child of their own at birth, and lived at a time when infant mortality was not uncommon. They were aware that should the unthinkable happen, funeral expenses could devastate a young family's finances if they were not well off.

In those days, it was meant as a thoughtful gesture - as morbid as it may sound today.

However, parents taking out life insurance policies on an infant nowadays, especially in the range of $25,000 to $50,000 and up, is quite another thing. Any insurance policy on a child that would pay out far in excess of covering average funeral expenses strikes me as crass beyond imagining - and should raise a lot of red flags if that child dies in questionable circumstances.

Both were cremated and put in a burial plot. My mom's plot had been purchased since my other sister died in 1969, but if we had to buy it, both funerals would have been around $10k....nothing lavish. If you add in a casket and body preservation for a traditional funeral add at least $5k. If the death occurred out of state or something and the body had to be transported add more cost.

we buried my grandmother last year in a simple service for less than $5k... not disputing they CAN get expensive but don't have to.

sP

and we spent around 8,000 for everything. And we had 2 funerals with receptions after due to where we grew up and where family members were. It can be done tastefully for a reasonable price. Some people pay 100K for weddings too but I would never spend that much and still have a nice wedding.

She was an atheist, so there wasn't a service. Didn't seem fair to put her through god-bothering when she couldn't fight back.

Just curious.

... $25,000 funerals is a whole 'nother topic.

My mother often worried about people who passed whose families "might not have enough money to bury them". And I, equally as often, pointed out that to the best of my knowledge, no dead person had as yet been left above-ground for lack of funds.

Funerals are for the living - they're of no use to the dead. If my kids spend more than the absolute minimum fees required to have me cremated and disposed of, I will come back to haunt them.

A burial policy is very common and often available for next to nothing even available through employers benefits packages. These are usually straight term life insurance, no cash value.

Another motivation for buying 'whole life' or 'universal life', insurance with a cash value, could be for an education fund. These types combine life insurance and a savings plan. The premiums are higher than term. These types of life often can be paid off after like 20 years leaving the cash value to grow and the life insurance in force.

In either case, premiums are low on children. I think burial policies often purchased by grandparents was more common 40 or 50 years ago. I have one purchased by my grandfather when I was born in the 60's. It had like a $2k death benefit. When I was destitute in college I took most of the cash value. I could have paid the policy back and restored the death benefit, as it is the death benefit will still be paid, but the pay out will be reduced by the cash value taken.

It could be sinister I suppose, usually it isn't sinister at all...

I would be suspicious if the policy was term insurance with a value exceeding a typical funeral, if it is a savings type policy which would have a cash value at age 18 of enough to pay for college may be justifiable.

I purchased it to cover expenses, god forbid, I never will need them.

Secondly, I purchased it as an investment for my son. When the policy matures, he can cash it in.

wants you to feel....

Bu the experts say it doesn't make sense:

One is whether the parents also had life insurance policies on themselves.

Second question is why would parents who are allegedly having financial problems be paying for a life insurance policy on an infant.

Talking about life insurance. After reading this thread, i reached the conclusion that I, as a senior with not a ton of years left, should purchase term insurance rather than whole life. is my assumption correct? And should i buy one of those policies that i get from my credit union every so often or could i shop around and get a better deal elsewhere?

I had term insurance for quite a while, pretty cheap. But when I hit 70 the premiums jumped up a LOT. Not worth it to me at that price. Look for alternative ways to provide for loved ones or fund a funeral.

Most parents with halfway decent jobs have policies on their kids to cover funeral expenses. The policies they had are not the red flag. Many other things are.

All of them put together create great suspicion.

Many parents have policies on our kids and it's not for nefarious reasons. The OP implies anyone with life insurance on their kids is subject to suspicion. That's totally false.

Many of these policies contain riders permitting the insured to increase the face value with no underwriting. Thus if the kid is diabetic or gets cancer or whatever, they still can get life insurance if they have one of these policies.

I'm guessing it was a simple term life.

My ex-wife and I did this for both of our daughters when they were babies. My brother died at 26, leaving a wife and child, and no life insurance due to the fact that he had been diagnosed with diabetes when he was 5 years old.

Diabetes runs in my family, and although I don't have it, we wanted to ensure that our daughters would always be able to have life insurance. We felt then and still feel that it was a solid decision.

I can purchase a small policy for my spouse and each of my kids for less than it would cost me to buy a cup of coffee each day.

If nothing else, it may defray funeral expenses if I should ever unfortunately need it.

It would seem to me that an insurance payment would help cover costs of the funeral and medical bills.

I don't know that it's crass in that case. It simply seems like a responsible, though regrettable, choice.

They become ill later in life, etc. I think that's what the insurance salesperson told me, trying to earn a commission.

When we were adults and financially secure, she cashed them in and gave the proceeds to us to buy something special we wanted!

They are very cheap and if something happens, funerals are very expensive. My mother had small policies on my kids because she knew if something happened to them I would not have the money to even bury them.

First. Let me say, I think evidence strongly suggests they conspired to murder that child. And they murdered that child in one of the most torturous cruelest methods possible.


But as far as the life insurance? Many people purchase them.

They are often marketed to working class families because they often have very little financial education.

A few dollars put into an invest fund for a child would be a much better financial plan.


But, I really don't think this is any dark mark at all.

And anyway, twenty five thousand dollars isn't that much money.

It's like on crime shows when the suspect asks to speak to a lawyer. And the cops cut their eyes at each other.

"Oh. You want a lawyer...huh? You are so OBVIOUSLY guilty now!" When, in fact. You should never, ever EVER be questioned by a cop without a lawyer. NEVER!

I think there are plenty of other things that point to this being premeditated murder on both of their parts. But the insurance is not one of them.

if the unthinkable happens - my sister had done that on her oldest, at least.

I had one my parents started in college. I guess it was the same type of purpose. I took it over eventually.

My mom took out policies on me and my brothers. One of ny brothers died and, while his funeral was very simple, it cost quite a few thousand. His body had to be transported to a different state, which was an added cost. He also had a child (born two months after my brother died), so part of that money went to him.

Also for a burial fund if needed. I would think it might be for the same reasons today. Gerber is still selling them.

many many years ago, back in the "good old days". It's not a new idea.

A left over from higher childhood mortality.

But there still is the potential embarrassment of not being able to pay for a child's funeral. Or a parents, for that matter.

I think my dad still pays the premium for it. I don't know much about it really. I'm 33.

I'm 61. My parents had life insurance for me and my two sisters way back when.


I have had one for my 10 year old grandson since he was born because his parents can't afford it.

Many policies have clauses that cover death until maturity, and then can be cashed in. IIRC, depending on the state, some even have UTMA tax-type incentives for continuing education.

It only cost $42.50 a year and that has never changed. Obviously, it costs more the older you get, so he got me a policy early on. I took over the payments when I was older. But I fear that this situation/story is not at all the same thing...

As noted elsewhere, it can cover funeral expenses, which are typically in the thousands of dollars. Upon adulthood, the policy can pass to the child as life insurance for which they can designate a new beneficiary. Has a cash value as well.

None of which is to say hastily purchased life insurance policies don't sometimes indicate ill intent.