Suit yourself: interest in life insurance is reviving, but insurers need to educate consumers so they can determine suitability of products for themselves. (Selling Insight: Life/Health).

It's true. Life insurance products have looked dull and dowdy for years. There was a time when just about everyone owned a life insurance policy. The poor and the rich shared the common bond of a life insurance policy.

Then came the more attractive financial products. Mutual funds ushered in a new day for millions of Americans. They were shareholders, and along with this new status came the dream of a worry-free future. What happened next is history. The tech world transformed modest 401(k) plans into untold riches, and a life insurance policy was dismissed as something father owned.

Now, life insurance is back. Big time--at least potentially. After $3 trillion in equity losses, Americans are opting for security. And it couldn't come at a better time for both the consumer and the life industry. The new mortality tables are driving down life insurance premium costs, making the products far more appealing to consumers.

With a little assistance from brokers and carriers, consumers may discover life insurance's unique ability to meet their needs at every stage of the life cycle. Unfortunately, such flexibility is often overlooked by those of us who sell the products and unknown to those who buy them.

Yet, as we begin to see an upturn in life insurance sales for the first time in a decade, distress rumblings are heard. For example, there are moves to hold agents and carriers responsible for selling the wrong life product. We sanitize by calling it "suitability."

Although it is seemingly appropriate for a 35-year-old father with a wife and three young children to purchase cost-effective term life, what about that same person 25 years later? To renew the policy, the rates are impractical for his situation, particularly since he has developed a serious health problem. Should the agent who sold the policy be blamed for failing to follow through with the policyholder? What if the agent is out of the business or deceased? Since the insurance company actually sold the policy and collected the premiums all these years, should it be held responsible?

As a society, we are moving in the direction of insisting that someone be held accountable for every act. If the coffee is too hot, then haul McDonald's into court. If the 60-year-old owner of an expiring term policy can't qualify for a more "suitable" product, then someone should be held responsible. The victim mentality marches on! For a country where citizens have long taken pride in taking charge of their own lives, constantly pinning blame is a step in the wrong direction.

Nothing is ever quite as simple and clear-cut as it may seem. Studies show that 70% of those who buy life products are never contacted after the sale. Some may say that the commission structure eliminates the motivation for continued contact. But that may be somewhat myopic. Decades ago, a consumer could buy a policy and never change it. It was good for life.

Life has changed. What's needed at one point in the life cycle may be inappropriate a few years later. Helping policyholders understand the need to review their life changes regularly with their life insurance agent would seem to be a no-brainer. The proliferation of products and changes in the tax codes require continuing competent advice.

Yet, we also know that what's right for an individual today can be inappropriate tomorrow. A 40-year-old father of three is attending a convention and accidentally falls down hotel stairs and dies. In planning for his retirement, he had bought a whole life policy before the accident, Would it be "suitable" for this unexpected event?

Here's the point: If we're going to hold agents and carriers to a "suitability" standard, why would anyone want to sell our products? Today, the problem with life insurance is that you never know what you need it for.

If we really believe in individuals taking responsibility for themselves, then the life insurance industry's major task is not to police agents but to make a continuing commitment to educate consumers on the need to be suitably protected with products that meet their needs at every point in their lives.

If we think consumers aren't capable of understanding what they need, then shame on us. We've tried policing and it has failed. The best consumer protection is a knowledgeable consumer.

Ronald D. Verzone, a Best's Review columnist, is president of United Underwriters Inc. of Exeter, N.H. He can be reached at [e-mail].