Does death due to heart disease qualify as being diagnosed with heart disease?
<p>I came across this question on a life insurance form:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>My biological parents or biological siblings have been diagnosed by a
  member of the medical profession with any of the following: cancer,
  heart disease, diabetes, kidney disease, Huntington's Disease, Marfan
  Syndrome, or Lynch Syndrome</p>
</blockquote>

<p>My father died with heart disease listed as the cause of death, but he was not <em>diagnosed</em> with heart disease. By the letter of the law, in this situation, would the answer to "does the above apply to me?" be yes or no?</p>

<p>In interpretting the words of a contract, the courts might consult a dictionary to sort out potential ambiguities, but a dictionary would not provide that kind of information. Instead of appealing to an authoritative source,they are likely to perform a reasonable man analysis, asking what a reasonable man would think a  "diagnosis" is. There is no special term that refers to detection of a condition after death, and the literature is full of references to post_mortem diagnoses. A reasonable man would this understand that a diagnosis of a condition after death is still a diagnosis.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>in this situation, would the answer to "does the above apply to me?" be yes or no?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>If none of your father's <em>prior</em> medical checks reflects heart disease (apropos of "<em>he was not diagnosed with heart disease</em>"), then you have merit in answering "<em>no</em>".</p>

<p>According to <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5687260/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this study from 2017</a>, "<em>heart disease was <strong>incorrectly</strong> identified as the cause of death on 54.5%–85% of death certificates</em>" (emphasis added). Therefore, a death certificate alone would hardly be cognizable grounds for insurer's denial of coverage or for a higher premium under pretext of your father's alleged cause of death.</p>

<p>Penalizing insurers essentially for sloppy practices in medical reporting would be unreasonable and does not reflect the exposure a life insurance company is supposed to assess.</p>

insurance