Page 29 - Newcom

holistic planning “To try to hook your longevity or life expectancy on some test, to me, is crazy” The situation would be dif- ferent for someone carrying the gene associated with longevity as well as the one associated with late-onset Alzheimer’s. A client in that situation may be advised to buy long-term care insurance due to the higher probability of living longer in an incapacitated state, he says. Genetic tests are a contro- versial tool. Canadian legislation passed in 2017 prevents insur- ance companies from asking for test results from applicants (see “The rules for insurance and gen- etic testing,” right). Dr. Carolyn McClanahan, a for- mer physician who’s director of financial planning at Life Planning Partners in Jacksonville, Fla., describes longevity in financial planning as “the holy grail.” But she’s not convinced that genetic testing will bring advisors any closer to it. “First off, it’s an inexact science. There are so many vari- ables, and to try to hook your lon- gevity or life expectancy on some test, to me, is crazy,” she says. “The second thing is, you don’t know when you’re going to get hit by a car. We need to focus on making certain that people have a good life now. If you’re not, you’re doing it wrong, because you don’t know if you’re going to have a tomorrow — even with genetic testing.” The rules for insurance and genetic testing Parliament passed the Genetic Non-Discrimination Act in 2017, pre- venting employers, insurance compan- ies and others from asking people to take genetic tests or to disclose genetic test results. However, the Liberal gov- ernment and several provinces said the law may infringe on provinces’ jurisdic- tion over health insurance. The insurance industry, worried the law would undermine the balance of information between customers and insurers, resulting in higher premiums, lobbied against the bill. The Quebec Court of Appeal ruled the law was unconstitutional late last year. The Supreme Court of Canada was scheduled to hear the case Oct. 10, as of press time. For now, it’s one of several signals Olshansky says advisors can use to predict longevity and enhance finan- cial planning. “While we can’t yet quantify the exact effect of the difference of face age on longevity, we’re approaching the point where we’re going to be able to do so,” he says. “For right now, if we can pick up on enough signals, like late age at menopause, young face age and family history of exceptional longevity, you’re getting some signals to indicate these individuals may \\\[live long lives\\\].“ To illustrate how those signals could impact financial planning, Olshansky uses the example of a couple in their early 70s who took a 23andMe genetic test. Actu- arial tables would say the wife is expected to outlive the husband by about three years. The husband has a family history of cardiovascular disease and the genetic test shows he doesn’t carry a gene associated with longev- ity. The wife has that gene, as well as one associated with a lower risk of developing Alzheimer’s. She also reached menopause at a late age and has a young- looking face. These factors suggest the roughly three-year difference in lifespan from the actuarial table could be much larger. “This husband and wife team are on completely different trajectories, but their advisor was completely unaware,” Olshansky says. “Imagine how you would plan differently if you had this information versus not having it.” McClanahan says a genetic test’s usefulness is limited, as many diseases are influenced by multiple genes. The test for late-onset Alzheimer’s disease has low predictive value, she says: those who test positive for the gene variant won’t necessarily get the disease, just as testing negative doesn’t mean a person is in the clear. The Alzheimer Society of Can- ada advises against testing for the common sporadic form of the disease as “no reliable genetic test exists.” 30 ADVISOR.CA 29