Medicare has obvious disadvantage compared to life insurance to the beneficiaries. For a Medicare program to run well in any given country, the government is forced to increase the percentage tax given out by the working employees and employers. This money, however, only caters for the elderly in the country, leaving out the young disadvantaged in terms of health. Life insurance on the other hand enjoys suitable tax treatment. Beneficiaries receive tax free death benefits. In case one requires policy loans, they are given on a tax free basis. During the insured's lifetime, cash values usually grow tax deferred.
Moreover, life insurance gives a substantial amount of money to cater for the large financial constrains incurred during the insured's death. This may go a long way in settling hospital bills and other funeral expenses. Medicare, however, is in no way helpful to the bereaved family, but only focuses on the health of elderly persons.
While Medicare has an eligibility age limit, it may lock out some needy yet aged individuals. Say the eligibility age is 67, a 65-year-old will be missing the services because of the two year difference, yet he deserves them. In life insurance however, one may access the benefits as early as possible in life without being limited to a certain age. Again, life insurance policies are extremely flexible. If need be, the premiums may be increased, reduced or skipped.
Medicare patients are in many ways disadvantaged. Report findings through questionnaires and interviews have shown that physicians give a much lower priority in appointments to Medicare patients. Other doctors admitted that they accept more new uninsured patients compared to new Medicare patients. Furthermore, doctors restrict some medical services to Medicare patients. Medical staff revealed that they get Medicare audits and are therefore trying to avoid Medicare patients as much as possible.