Sorry for the noob post but this is a subject I have pretty much no knowledge of. After having too many horror stories about public hospitals I thought I'd look into the possibility of private health insurance for me and the mrs. We are 53 and 50 respectively with NO known health problems, we eat right and exercise and are not overweight. If something does happen and we need hospital care I would rather end up in private hospital rather than public. Apart from all the newspaper horror stories I personally know 2guys up here who were severely messed up by the public hospital. We don't really need a policy that has a ton of bells and whistles but does cover us as much as possible in case of hospital emergencies. I should add that apart from a car accident back in '93 neither of us have been in hospital. So if anyone could suggest a trustworthy insurer and policy that would be greatly appreciated.
Health Insurance for over 50's?
Last edited 30/05/2018 - 08:09
Comments
Great summary.
Private cover does include dental, optical, etc., but as you state the rebates do not equate to the premiums.
I'm in an employer-funded private health cover for me +1, both >60, and would probably not continue the cover if I left this employer, without very careful consideration of our non-urgent needs.
Good summary, unfortunately this is wrong:
"private cover does not offer any medical benefits for emergency care"Private hospitals can offer emergency care, it's just that many do not (or choose not) to do this because of business/economic reasons.
Both sectors have horror stories. You can get private cover for a public hospital which can give you access to your preferred doctor. The problem is that even healthy people can be hit by health issues as they age. The best thing you can do to avoid horror stories is to get a GP with good connections in the Specialist fields; they know who to recommend.
Make sure you get regular checkups to stop small things becoming big things.
You need to be careful about getting some medical procedures done at Private facilities that you can get through the Public System. My other half was happy to pay for his Angiogram from a private hospital, but they wouldn't let him do it in case something went wrong and they had to admit him to the hospital which would've been a whole world of cost.
Save your money, horror stories occur due to people making mistakes, and in private, people equally can make mistakes.
Thanks all, so don't bother then?
Pros of private hospitals:
1. You get to choose your specialist. In the public, you're more or less stuck with whoever is on-take for the day. The day to day treatment decisions/actions are made by registrars (doctors in specialist training) with varying degrees of supervision from the specialist.
2. The waiting list is shorter in the private for non-urgent treatment.
3. Dependent on your cover, it may pay for ambulance costs… it's not covered by Medicare.
4. Some procedures are not available in the public (e.g. not true anymore, but robotic surgery was mostly in the private when it was first introduced)Pros of public hospitals:
1. Better staffed after-hours. The smaller the private hospital, the likelihood is there will be fewer or less experienced staff to respond to any issues after-hours. The bigger private hospitals are pretty good, but they can't match most public hospitals who have on-site registrars.
2. Some procedures are not available in the private. These tend to be longer, more complex, emergency or very sub-specialized treatments.Remember, you can still go to a public hospital using private insurance. And if you're uninsured, you can go to a private hospital as a self-funded patient (assuming you can afford it).
Beware though, there are some terrible policies whose sole purpose is to avoid the Medicare levy.
Thanks for that. Yes the number of policies out there is mostly why I asked you guys for advice. :)
Unfortunately, the health insurance system is set up against you.
And obviously:
The private health insurance system in this country is badly broken, and it needs to be fixed. I think the best fix would be to divert the resources subsidising private care into improving public care - but the shareholders and employees of health funds loudly feel that is a bad idea.