Older people "living in sin" & health care

Case study:

my friend..we'll call her "Sue".

Sue's husband died 4 years ago. He was 71. She's now 60, and living off his social security.

She was a stay-at-home Mom for most of her adult life, so her SS is pretty bleak.

As long as she's his widow, she gets his benefits, but she has no health care for herself. (He had a small pension too, but there were no benefits for health care)

Her husband's final illness took most of their savings, and she had to move to a smaller place (they were renting by the time he died, after a 3 year struggle with cancer)

Now she's met a man, and is in "late-in-life-love". She desperately wants to marry him, but cannot afford to give up her source of income (the SS & small pension)..

If she marries her new love, she would be eligible for medical coverage under his medical plan where he still works, but there have been layoffs there, and he's not all that sure how much longer he'll have a job..(He's 61, and had planned to work until age 70)

So for now, and probably for always, they cannot afford to marry, even though they both would dearly love to get married.

In a civilized country, each would be guaranteed an old-age pension that was for them..not because of another's labors, and they would each have their own medical coverage.

Next month they plan to move in together.. something that neither of them had ever thought of doing before. Their grown kids think it's "cute", but they don't.

5 years ago, she and her former husband owed less than $8K on a house, had money saved, and life looked good...now she's choosing between health care and an income, and marriage & "shacking up"..

We all tell her it's no "biggie", but to the daughter of a Lutheran minister, it's hard for her to come to terms with it all .

Evidently we're not ready to join the civilized world.

I, too, am living on my late husband's social security, significantly reduced of course because I took it at 60 instead of 66. His illness was short, which allowed me to survive with the last two years of our mortage paid off from life insurance proceeds. But I'm not living in clover, believe me. I have no health insurance, and with a pre-existing condition, I cannot get anything even remotely affordable. So far, my health is good and my medical needs affordable out of pocket. Knock on wood.

But as far as "shacking up," I have no qualms, and I would say to her, even if she is the daughter of a Lutheran minister, that it's the quality of the relationship that counts, both here on earth and with whatever god, goddess, or other deities she believes in. If they're so all powerful and all knowing, then they see and know how totally fucked up our system is. And they'll care more about a loving relationship outside of marriage than of a brutal and insincere one that has benefit of clergy.


Just the two atheistic cents of


Tansy Gold

He has no pension and I'll have a measly $397.00 a month on mine (no health benefits), and my husband has no life insurance :(

Can't afford it. He's got heart problems and diabetes, and the premiums are prohibitive. I think we'll look into some of the el-cheapo ones offered on tv late at night, to cover final expenses at least, but there's no policy waiting to be cashed in to pay off the house..

I don't like this house anyway, and look forward to getting rid of it , but with the market tanking, there will be little if any "profit".

to have them exchange the vows... do a religious ceremony, which to them is what counts, but NOT do the civil part which is what will screw them. I'm sure some pastor will help them out on that.

and then just tell their friends they got married..No one "needs" to know everything :rofl:

and keep it discretely from the rest of the family. Due to the weird laws in the two states in which I operate, I just shift "marriage" to "union" just as I do for same-sex couples (I can't say marriage, even though whatever deity and I may differ from the state, isn't that some shit) and everybody's happy. The couple have a heartfelt blessing, they have a nice wedding ceremony, their guests see them off into the next part of their life; win, win, win. Many pastors absolutely will not do this, but many professional officiants will.

Tell her that God probably thinks she deserves a break and a little happiness in her last years and won't be too upset about her choice.

The scenario you presented doesn't necessarily reflect the state of her potential survival benefits:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/your-most-pressing-social-security-questions-answered

Q: If a woman (widow) remarries, would she lose her Social Security benefits if she receives Social Security based on her own work record? If she were collecting Social Security based on her former husband's work record, would she lose that pension? If she lost it by remarrying, would she get it back again if her present husband dies or gets divorced?

A: According to an SSA representative, "the remarriage of a widow(er) does not affect benefits received on his/her own work record. The remarriage will only affect a widow(er), if he/she is receiving benefits as a surviving spouse, surviving divorced spouse or disabled widow.

"Generally, you cannot get widow's or widower's benefits if you remarry before age 60. But remarriage after age 60 (or age 50 if you are disabled) will not prevent you from getting benefit payments based on your former spouse's work. And at age 62 or older, you may get benefits based on your new spouse's work, if those benefits would be higher.

And "generally, benefits cannot continue to be paid if the divorced spouse remarries someone other than the former spouse, unless the latter marriage ends (whether by death, divorce, or annulment), or the marriage is to a person entitled to certain types of Social Security auxiliary or survivor's benefits." For more information, visit this Web site.

Many other answers to Social Security questions can be found at the main Social Security site, www.socialsecurity.gov. Visit the site.

I'll tell her:) :loveya:

She's just now 60, so she may not have checked it out recently..

*

we need single payer healthcare now.

the money a couple has saved up goes to the husband's medical expenses. The wife is often the only caretaker of the ill spouse. When he dies, the money is gone and her future is Medicaid to cover her medical expenses.
Much is made of the fact that women live longer than men but what that means is the men are well taken care of by their spouses. The reality for women is that they face the rest of their lives broke and dependent upon Medicaid.
the bush administration floated the idea to cut the SS of surviving spouses. At least that did not go anywhere.