Nationwide to discontinue health insurance for pets

[macoduck]

I don't use Nationwide's pet coverage, but many people with aging pets will likely find it difficult to get coverage elsewhere.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/nationwide-dropping-pet-insurance-100000

[ramonaghan]

This is terrible, and hits way too close to home for me (we're with Pets Best and have been pleased). I suspect they will lose a bunch of other policy holders for this move.

[rsieg]

After my experience with Healthy Paws (jacking up the rates to obscene levels when Logan got to be a senior), I don't trust any of these pet insurance companies. The point is to get the insurance while the dog is young and healthy and pay in, with the insurance company knowing it gets money at low risk early on and should then accept the higher risk when the dog gets to be a senior. But unlike human insurance, there is nothing obligating the company to fulfill its end of the bargain as your dog ages.

If you can afford it, I think you are better off putting the money aside in your own bank account and letting it accumulate over the years. Of course, not everyone can do that.

[ramonaghan]

1 hour ago, rsieg said:

After my experience with Healthy Paws (jacking up the rates to obscene levels when Logan got to be a senior), I don't trust any of these pet insurance companies. The point is to get the insurance while the dog is young and healthy and pay in, with the insurance company knowing it gets money at low risk early on and should then accept the higher risk when the dog gets to be a senior. But unlike human insurance, there is nothing obligating the company to fulfill its end of the bargain as your dog ages.

If you can afford it, I think you are better off putting the money aside in your own bank account and letting it accumulate over the years. Of course, not everyone can do that.

Totally agree with your point that most insurance companies are scum and the rate hikes outrageous, but having had two dogs in a row with osteo, I still feel it's better than socking away the equivalent amount in savings. We pay Pets Best a little over $50/month total for 6-year-olds Doolin and Willa, so even if we put quadruple that amount in savings, we'd be nowhere near the ~$20k we've spent on Willa's amp, chemo, x-rays, CT scan, biopsy, etc., the past year. Sweep's total bills were $27k, 90% of which was covered by Healthy Paws after we met our deductible. Obviously, these are worst-case scenarios (and Willa getting cancer at 5 is an outlier), but being able to authorize any and all treatments without worrying about cost has been hugely helpful when decision-making time is short and stress is high. And both dogs got many more good months thanks to those treatments.

Just wanted to provide this info since this monster of a disease takes so many of our hounds...and will soon be taking our Willa too. 

[rsieg]

30 minutes ago, ramonaghan said:

Totally agree with your point that most insurance companies are scum and the rate hikes outrageous, but having had two dogs in a row with osteo, I still feel it's better than socking away the equivalent amount in savings. We pay Pets Best a little over $50/month total for 6-year-olds Doolin and Willa, so even if we put quadruple that amount in savings, we'd be nowhere near the ~$20k we've spent on Willa's amp, chemo, x-rays, CT scan, biopsy, etc., the past year. Sweep's total bills were $27k, 90% of which was covered by Healthy Paws after we met our deductible. Obviously, these are worst-case scenarios (and Willa getting cancer at 5 is an outlier), but being able to authorize any and all treatments without worrying about cost has been hugely helpful when decision-making time is short and stress is high. And both dogs got many more good months thanks to those treatments.

Just wanted to provide this info since this monster of a disease takes so many of our hounds...and will soon be taking our Willa too. 

Good counterpoints. I was fortunate enough that neither of my dogs had osteo (or any serious illness until the end).