Forum: Don’t let medical progress become a loophole for insurers

The recent case of a policyholder’s $100,000 claim being rejected because her brain surgery was “minimally invasive” rather than “open-skull” highlights a growing injustice for long-term insurance holders.

The Life Insurance Association (LIA) recently updated its Critical Illness Framework (effective October 2025) to include modern “keyhole” and endovascular treatments. This is a clear admission by the industry that old, highly invasive definitions are medically obsolete. 

However, these updates are not retrospective. This creates a two-tier system where those who have dutifully paid premiums for decades are penalised for the very medical progress that makes surgery safer.

They face a difficult choice: undergo riskier, outdated surgery to qualify for a payout, or choose a safer, modern procedure and pay for it themselves.

I urge the Monetary Authority of Singapore to mandate that insurers apply current LIA definitions to all active policies. It is unfair for insurers to take refuge in “contractual certainty” when medical science has advanced. Insurance must protect the patient, not the procedure.

David Lok Seow Kang