Haris Ashley
During the 1850s, Aetna, the nation's largest health insurer, sold policies that reimbursed slave owners for financial losses when those they enslaved died. The company has since apologised for its involvement in the slave trade and has denied reparations. Records show that Aetna insured slaves in Mississippi, Kentucky, Missouri, Tennessee, South Carolina, Alabama, and Louisiana.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Number of slave policies | 4 |
| Years of involvement | 1853-1858 |
| Branches involved | 5 (Missouri, South Carolina, Alabama, Louisiana, and Kentucky) |
| Slave insurance policy holders | White slave owners |
| Slave insurance type | Life insurance |
| Slave insurance payouts | 60% to 75% of a slave's value |
| Slave insurance policy cost | $15 annual premium |
| Slave insurance policy duration | 12 months |
| Slave insurance payout amount | $600 |
| Slave value | $1,000 |
| Slave name | Lucinda |
| Slave owner | William H. Brand |
| Slave occupation | House servant |
| Slave age | 21 |
| Apology | Yes |
| Reparations | No |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
Aetna apologises for insuring slaves
Aetna, the nation's largest health insurer, has apologised for issuing slave policies during the 1850s. The company acknowledged that for several years after its founding in 1853, it may have insured the lives of slaves. The apology came in response to an inquiry from activist and attorney Deadria Farmer-Paellmann, who sought an apology and reparations.
Aetna spokesman Fred Laberge expressed deep regret, saying, "We express our deep regret over any participation at all in this deplorable practice." Laberge also stated that the company had only found a small number of such policies in their archives, with premiums totalling less than a hundred dollars. He emphasised the sensitivity of the issue and stated that beyond the apology, the company would take no further action.
Aetna's involvement in insuring slaves was uncovered through various sources. The company conducted an extensive internal search through its archives, reviewing historical policies, annual reports, company publications, and other relevant documents. Ace, a successor to Aetna Fire, also discovered and disclosed a copy of a slave policy written by Aetna Life in 1855, insuring the life of a slave named Peter in Mississippi. Additionally, Farmer-Paellmann provided copies of two policies dated 1854 and 1858, indicating Aetna's involvement in selling slave policies for at least four years.
Historians Michael Ralph and William Rankin identified five Aetna branches that were particularly active in Missouri, South Carolina, Alabama, Louisiana, and Kentucky. One example is the life insurance policy issued to a white slave owner, William H. Brand, for his 21-year-old enslaved house servant, Lucinda. The policy authorised a payout of $600 if Lucinda died within a year, with Brand valuing Lucinda at $1,000 in 1853, or $33,000 in today's currency.
Aetna's apology is part of a broader reckoning with the legacy of slavery, as universities, corporations, and financial institutions grapple with their ties to this painful period of history.
Rottweilers: Insurable or Not?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Slave insurance policies were legal
Slave insurance policies were financial instruments that allowed slave owners to insure against the death or loss of their slaves. This became an increasingly significant industry after the Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves, a federal law that took effect in 1808, which prevented any new slaves from being imported to the U.S. As a result, existing slaves, especially skilled workers, became more valuable and were often rented out to businesses. Slave owners could insure against the death or loss of these rented slaves, and industries that rented insured skilled slaves included blacksmithing, carpentry, railroad construction, coal mining, and steamboat operations.
Several major insurance companies participated in insuring enslaved people, including Aetna, New York Life Insurance Company, US Life, and Wells Fargo. In 2010, Aetna acknowledged issuing slave policies during the 1850s and offered an apology, but denied reparations. Similarly, New York Life has expressed regret for its involvement in the slave insurance business, acknowledging that while it only accounted for about 5% of total revenues during the three fiscal years, it helped the company establish an early foothold in the South.
The discovery of slave insurance policies has sparked discussions about reparations to the descendants of African slaves, with some insurance companies providing full disclosure of their records and participating in slavery era insurance registry reports. These reports aim to contribute to society's understanding of the slavery era and assist in genealogical research.
Key Scratches: Are They Covered by Insurance?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Aetna's slave insurance policy search
In 2010, Aetna, the nation's largest health insurer, acknowledged issuing slave insurance policies during the 1850s and offered an apology. The company's spokesman, Fred Laberge, stated that Aetna "may have insured the lives of slaves for several years shortly after its founding in 1853." He emphasized their deep regret over any participation in the deplorable practice.
Aetna's public apology was prompted by an inquiry from Deadria Farmer-Paellmann, a New York attorney and activist, who sought an apology and reparations. In response, Aetna acknowledged the existence of four such policies in their archives, with premiums totalling less than a hundred dollars. One of these policies was for a 21-year-old enslaved "house servant" named Lucinda, valued at $1,000 in 1853. Lucinda's owner, William H. Brand, a lawyer and businessman from Lexington, Kentucky, paid a $15 annual premium, which would have allowed him to collect 60% of Lucinda's valuation if she died.
To comply with legislation and in response to Farmer-Paellmann's inquiry, Aetna conducted an extensive internal search through its archives to locate records, files, and other information related to its business activities during the slavery era. This included historical policies, annual reports, company publications, and communications. They also contacted former subsidiaries and academic institutions to gather information.
Despite their efforts, Aetna stated that they did not find conclusive evidence of extensive participation in the slave insurance business. However, they acknowledged the possibility of incomplete archives and the destruction of documents beyond a certain age, making it challenging to determine the full extent of their involvement.
It is important to note that Aetna is not the only company that has faced scrutiny for its ties to slavery. Over 40 other firms, mostly based in the South, sold slave insurance policies, and banks absorbed by JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo also had historical connections to slavery.
Generate Mortgage Life Insurance Leads: Strategies for Success
You may want to see also
Slave insurance policies were unprofitable
During the slavery era, slave insurance policies were a common practice among insurance companies. These policies reimbursed slave owners for financial losses incurred when their slaves died. While the exact profitability of slave insurance policies is difficult to determine due to limited historical records, there is evidence suggesting that such policies were not a significant source of profits for insurance companies like Aetna.
Aetna, the nation's largest health insurer, has acknowledged and apologized for its involvement in issuing slave insurance policies during the 1850s. In response to inquiries, Aetna conducted an extensive internal search through its archives to locate relevant records and documents. They found that the Aetna Life Insurance Company (ALIC) was the only one of their companies in existence during the slavery era.
According to Fred LeBerge, a spokesperson for Aetna, they only had four slave insurance policies in their archives, with premiums totalling less than a hundred dollars. LeBerge stated that Aetna wrote very few of these policies, and the premiums generated from them were insignificant. However, it is important to note that Aetna may not have complete archives, and the extent of their involvement in insuring slaveholders may not be fully known.
The case of New York Life Insurance, which sold 508 slave insurance policies, provides further insight into the profitability of such practices. While the exact figures for Aetna are not available, a comparison can be drawn with New York Life Insurance. Similar to New York Life Insurance, Aetna's involvement in slave insurance policies was brief and constituted a small portion of its overall business. New York Life Insurance ended up paying out almost as much in death claims as it received in annual payments, indicating that slave insurance policies were not a profitable venture for the company.
In conclusion, while slave insurance policies existed and were issued by companies like Aetna, they did not appear to be a significant source of profits. The impact of these policies on the companies' growth and development was limited, and they were largely unprofitable. The companies' involvement in this practice, however, remains a painful reminder of their connection to the slavery era.
HSA and Group Term Life Insurance: What's the Difference?
You may want to see also
Other companies that insured slaves
During the slavery era in the United States, several insurance companies wrote policies insuring slave owners against the loss, damage, or death of their slaves. The discovery of these practices has brought attention to the history of these companies, with some offering apologies and others declining to comment.
New York Life Insurance
New York Life Insurance, one of the nation's Fortune 100 companies, sold 508 policies covering slaves in its early days. While the company's executives claim that the slave policies generated only about 5% of total revenues and were unprofitable, historians argue that they helped New York Life establish a presence in the South. The company's first president, James De Peyster Ogden, later described the system of human bondage as "evil".
US Life (a subsidiary of AIG)
US Life, a subsidiary of insurance giant AIG, has declined to comment on its sales of slave policies. According to available records, US Life sold fewer policies than New York Life and Aetna.
JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo
Banks that were eventually absorbed by JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo allowed Southerners to use their slaves as collateral for loans. These banks took possession of some slaves when their owners defaulted on loans.
Baltimore Life
Baltimore Life expanded its sales of slave policies, and by the eve of the Civil War, they accounted for more than two-thirds of new policies. They were willing to insure slaves working in railroad construction but declined to insure those working in coal pits due to the associated risks.
Richmond Fire Association and Lynchburg Hose and Fire Insurance Company
These fire insurance companies competed for slave risks during the 1850s, offering coverage to slaveholders for damage to or death of their slaves. By 1853, the Richmond Fire Association had written over 1,700 slave policies.
The Merchants Bank and The Leather Manufactures Bank
These banks, named in an 1852 circular, were identified as institutions able to pay and adjust claims for slave owners seeking protection from loss.
In addition to these companies, it is estimated that over 40 other firms, mostly based in the South, were involved in selling slave insurance policies. The discovery of these practices has brought a mix of reactions, with some companies apologizing and others remaining silent. The impact of these policies on the development of the insurance industry and the legacy of slavery in the United States continues to be a subject of historical and legislative interest.
Senior Life Insurance: Scam or Legit?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Yes, Aetna has acknowledged that it insured slaves in the 1850s, shortly after its founding in 1853.
Yes, in 2000, Aetna issued a public apology for its involvement in the slave insurance industry.
No, despite calls for reparations, Aetna has stated that it will not be taking any further action beyond its apology.
Aetna has stated that it only has four slave insurance policies in its archives, but it is unclear if these are the only policies ever sold by the company.
Yes, several other companies sold slave insurance policies, including New York Life, AIG (formerly US Life), and Wells Fargo.
