• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who should get the insurance money?

Who should get the insurance money?

  • Total voters
    19
roguenuke

roguenuke

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Messages
66,572
Reaction score
29,891
Location
Rolesville, NC
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Okay so I saw this story and I love it.

Court says ex-wife gets man's insurance money

I want to know what you all think. Who should get the money? The widow? The ex-wife? Some other relative? Someone else entirely?

And why.

I think the right decision was made and in fact, I think it should always be whoever is written on the policy, no matter the policy. I do feel bad when someone forgets to change a policy, but that is a very good reason why whenever a life event happens, marriage, divorce, death, you check your legal paperwork and ensure that it reflects your wishes in consideration of that new event. This guy had plenty of time to change that document. He should have ensured it got done.

I don't think it would be right for us to accidentally overrule someone's stated wishes for someone else failing to keep up with their affairs/paperwork. I know my own father has told his children that he has a life insurance policy that names my mother as his beneficiary, despite being married currently to someone else. If my mother ever agreed to take my father back, he would get divorced from the "new" wife in a heartbeat, but since my mother won't and he can't stand to be alone, he stays married to her.

As a side note, I believe the ex-wife should sue to get back the lawyer/court costs for having to deal with this.
 
roguenuke said:
Okay so I saw this story and I love it.

Court says ex-wife gets man's insurance money

I want to know what you all think. Who should get the money? The widow? The ex-wife? Some other relative? Someone else entirely?

And why.

I think the right decision was made and in fact, I think it should always be whoever is written on the policy, no matter the policy. I do feel bad when someone forgets to change a policy, but that is a very good reason why whenever a life event happens, marriage, divorce, death, you check your legal paperwork and ensure that it reflects your wishes in consideration of that new event. This guy had plenty of time to change that document. He should have ensured it got done.

I don't think it would be right for us to accidentally overrule someone's stated wishes for someone else failing to keep up with their affairs/paperwork. I know my own father has told his children that he has a life insurance policy that names my mother as his beneficiary, despite being married currently to someone else. If my mother ever agreed to take my father back, he would get divorced from the "new" wife in a heartbeat, but since my mother won't and he can't stand to be alone, he stays married to her.

As a side note, I believe the ex-wife should sue to get back the lawyer/court costs for having to deal with this.
Click to expand...

Exactly....
 
The ex-wife was on the policy, she should be the one receiving money. It was the deceased who signed off on this and legally it's the ex-wife's.

Getting married to someone else shouldn't warp, alter, or change other pre-existing contracts like that.
 
Since you can make anybody a beneficiary (including for the benefit of a pet), what is on the documents is what stands.
 
While I agree, legally the ex-wife should get the money, I think the widow should be entitled to some of it. Kind of like alimony when a divorce happens. Arguably the widow is more hurt financially than the ex-wife and does deserve some compensation with her husband's passing.
 
Chaddelamancha said:
While I agree, legally the ex-wife should get the money, I think the widow should be entitled to some of it. Kind of like alimony when a divorce happens. Arguably the widow is more hurt financially than the ex-wife and does deserve some compensation with her husband's passing.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. It is more than possible that there were other funds and assets that the widow got.
 
roguenuke said:
Okay so I saw this story and I love it.

Court says ex-wife gets man's insurance money

I want to know what you all think. Who should get the money? The widow? The ex-wife? Some other relative? Someone else entirely?

And why.

I think the right decision was made and in fact, I think it should always be whoever is written on the policy, no matter the policy. I do feel bad when someone forgets to change a policy, but that is a very good reason why whenever a life event happens, marriage, divorce, death, you check your legal paperwork and ensure that it reflects your wishes in consideration of that new event. This guy had plenty of time to change that document. He should have ensured it got done.

I don't think it would be right for us to accidentally overrule someone's stated wishes for someone else failing to keep up with their affairs/paperwork. I know my own father has told his children that he has a life insurance policy that names my mother as his beneficiary, despite being married currently to someone else. If my mother ever agreed to take my father back, he would get divorced from the "new" wife in a heartbeat, but since my mother won't and he can't stand to be alone, he stays married to her.

As a side note, I believe the ex-wife should sue to get back the lawyer/court costs for having to deal with this.
Click to expand...

I was amazed to read THIS:

Virginia law revokes a beneficiary designation in favor of the current spouse.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. The ex gets the money. But as to your opinion that the current wife should have to pay the ex's attorney fees? There we disagree. She brought the suit in light of Virginia law as I quoted above. It wasn't malicious. We can't start penalizing people for bringing rightful lawsuits...we'd stop having them. And that shouldn't happen.
 
Wow, that is messy. The Virginia law does make sense and typically if you name someone other than your spouse a beneficiary, the spouse has to approve.

If the employee lived in Virginia, not sure why Federal rules would have to trump except obviously the ex-wife is glad that it does.
 
True, there could be extenuating circumstances, as with every legal case. I am just saying there should be the possibility of payment.

roguenuke said:
Not necessarily. It is more than possible that there were other funds and assets that the widow got.
Click to expand...
 
AliHajiSheik said:
Wow, that is messy. The Virginia law does make sense and typically if you name someone other than your spouse a beneficiary, the spouse has to approve.

If the employee lived in Virginia, not sure why Federal rules would have to trump except obviously the ex-wife is glad that it does.
Click to expand...

Virginia's law is a nanny law. "He must've forgotten to change it." Bull****.

Your statement about your spouse having to agree if you name someone other than your spouse is incorrect. The owner of a life insurance can name whoever they please as beneficiary.
 
AliHajiSheik said:
Wow, that is messy. The Virginia law does make sense and typically if you name someone other than your spouse a beneficiary, the spouse has to approve.

If the employee lived in Virginia, not sure why Federal rules would have to trump except obviously the ex-wife is glad that it does.
Click to expand...

It was a federal employee's life insurance policy.
 
MaggieD said:
I agree with you. The ex gets the money. But as to your opinion that the current wife should have to pay the ex's attorney fees? There we disagree. She brought the suit in light of Virginia law as I quoted above. It wasn't malicious. We can't start penalizing people for bringing rightful lawsuits...we'd stop having them. And that shouldn't happen.
Click to expand...

The only thing is though that if it costs pretty much the same amount to defend the money that you're going to get, or worse, more, then we would have the same thing, only the opposite way, people not able to defend their rights against others who are trying to get more than they deserve or violate their rights under the law because they cannot afford it. It really is a hard choice. It would definitely be better if we didn't have to have court cases cost so much.

I realize I would be upset if I didn't get the life insurance money should my husband pass, but I would definitely consider that our fault because the rules are right there and we are informed of them often.
 
roguenuke said:
Okay so I saw this story and I love it.

Court says ex-wife gets man's insurance money

I want to know what you all think. Who should get the money? The widow? The ex-wife? Some other relative? Someone else entirely?

And why.

I think the right decision was made and in fact, I think it should always be whoever is written on the policy, no matter the policy. I do feel bad when someone forgets to change a policy, but that is a very good reason why whenever a life event happens, marriage, divorce, death, you check your legal paperwork and ensure that it reflects your wishes in consideration of that new event. This guy had plenty of time to change that document. He should have ensured it got done.

I don't think it would be right for us to accidentally overrule someone's stated wishes for someone else failing to keep up with their affairs/paperwork. I know my own father has told his children that he has a life insurance policy that names my mother as his beneficiary, despite being married currently to someone else. If my mother ever agreed to take my father back, he would get divorced from the "new" wife in a heartbeat, but since my mother won't and he can't stand to be alone, he stays married to her.

As a side note, I believe the ex-wife should sue to get back the lawyer/court costs for having to deal with this.
Click to expand...

I think it's a terrible tragedy, but we have to go with the person on the policy. We have no way of knowing what he actually wanted.
 
MaggieD said:
Virginia's law is a nanny law. "He must've forgotten to change it." Bull****.

Your statement about your spouse having to agree if you name someone other than your spouse is incorrect. The owner of a life insurance can name whoever they please as beneficiary.
Click to expand...

If Virginia has such a law, that is their business.

I should have been more clear. Typically for group life insurance policies, the sponsoring organization will often require a spouse to approve the naming of an alternate beneficiary from the spouse. It helps keep them out of the mess.
 
AliHajiSheik said:
Wow, that is messy. The Virginia law does make sense and typically if you name someone other than your spouse a beneficiary, the spouse has to approve.

If the employee lived in Virginia, not sure why Federal rules would have to trump except obviously the ex-wife is glad that it does.
Click to expand...

I suspect that it was because it was a federal employee insurance policy. I suspect that if this had been a state employee insurance policy the decision would have gone the other way.
 
The designated beneficiary is the designated beneficiary, period.

In other news, Virginia lawmakers suck. :)
 
Whoever the insurance policy is taken out on should be the one determining where the money goes. He designated it to go to his ex wife (whether because he forgot to change it or he meant it to happen, who knows) so she should get it.
 
I suspect this was an oversight on the part of the husband, but the decision was correct. Trying to mind-read a person's intent after their death would only open up a whole pandora's box.
 
Seriously, how in the hell does a man forget something like that? Even if he forgot to change it when he divorced, he sure as hell should have remembered when he got married again.
 
Viktyr Gehrig said:
Seriously, how in the hell does a man forget something like that? Even if he forgot to change it when he divorced, he sure as hell should have remembered when he got married again.
Click to expand...
Meh. I'm the kind of person that would forget something like that. Or, just procrastinate it away.
 
I think it should depend on the details of the case. Suppose, for instance, that the relationship and subsequent divorce from the ex-wife were brutal. Suppose it turned out that she betrayed him in some spectacular way, even though he loved her to death. And perhaps, because of his emotional state, he forgot to change the policy. Suppose he left documents indicating he thought he had changed the policy. Saying that it should be whoever appears on the insurance policy, full stop, is not a rule designed to produce a just outcome in every occurence.
 
Thanks to reading this, I'm definitely taking out my life insurance policy on my kids.
 
ashurbanipal said:
I think it should depend on the details of the case. Suppose, for instance, that the relationship and subsequent divorce from the ex-wife were brutal. Suppose it turned out that she betrayed him in some spectacular way, even though he loved her to death. And perhaps, because of his emotional state, he forgot to change the policy. Suppose he left documents indicating he thought he had changed the policy. Saying that it should be whoever appears on the insurance policy, full stop, is not a rule designed to produce a just outcome in every occurence.
Click to expand...

He forgot about it for over a decade? He got remarried. If you care for someone enough to marry them, then you really should take care of this stuff right away. As soon as I got back with my marriage certificate I changed my policy. It was a simply side trip during work. Unless he was retired or something, he should have been able to visit his HR/admin at work and get it changed. Would have taken about 10 mins tops. And if he had medical insurance through his work, then it could have been done at pretty much the same time that he changed that paperwork.
 
Or he could have made his estate the beneficiary and let his will decide the assets---not unusual if part of that was to cover burial costs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom