Insuring a freelance practice
A freelance practice may need cover for health costs, lost income, professional claims, accidents and business equipment. The appropriate cover depends on location, the work performed, contractual obligations and policies already in place.
Location, clients and existing cover
Insurance needs vary by country and client. In 2024, a German freelance described arranging personal health insurance as necessary there and unemployment insurance as an optional safety net; recruiters usually asked for liability cover in her experience, while larger companies sometimes did and other clients did not. Regional and client requirements should be established. Professional insurance can also depend on the projects undertaken in a particular year, and a freelance business forum can provide peers' experience of similar requirements.
Existing clinical cover may extend to writing, but the insurer should be asked. In an undated doctors' webinar from approximately 2018–2019, a GP described informing her medical defence organisation about a website and book giving general information rather than personal advice; it suggested disclaimer changes, recorded the activity as private doctor work and charged no additional premium. Informing the insurer gave her peace of mind and a record of disclosure if a complaint arose.
A 2015 US recommendation included professional liability, general liability and workers’ compensation insurance as sources of security and peace of mind, while considering lawsuits against freelance medical writers rare.
Professional organisations may offer access to indemnity plans, and negotiating client-provided professional insurance is another possibility, although not every client will agree.
Health and income protection
Health insurance may be obtained through a working spouse or partner, an individual policy or an association; benefits and cost influence the choice. In the US before the Affordable Care Act, one writer obtained small-business health insurance by incorporating and employing her husband full-time. In a November 2018 US discussion, some freelances had spousal cover or plentiful state options, including in Massachusetts, while others found few satisfactory or affordable plans.
Historical examples show the differences between individual arrangements. One US freelance paid about $750 a month in 1989 for a group-of-one family policy covering four people, with two $250 deductibles and a $2,500 annual out-of-pocket maximum; by the account published in 2019, an individual HMO policy cost about $1,100 monthly with a $6,200 deductible and $7,900 out-of-pocket maximum. Another moved from Freelancers Union insurance to New York's state marketplace after rates increased and paid $487.50 monthly for single coverage in 2019. A third had never found a group policy and paid for individual cover, considering the high cost part of living and doing business in the US.
Disability insurance protects income when illness, injury or an accident prevents work over a long period. It is strongly recommended where the freelance or family depends on that income, including when freelancing supplies a second household income. Policies vary in their definition of disability, including mental and physical conditions, the amount paid, waiting periods and benefit duration, so short- and long-term financial scenarios should guide the percentage of monthly income insured. Locally available programmes and several insurers' offers should be compared because conditions vary across countries and regions.
A 2007 US example illustrates the need to review a disability policy as earnings change: a writer who paid the annual premium without reviewing cover discovered during illness that the insured income was far below current earnings. A cost-of-living adjustment would have required a higher premium. That account described short-term policies with waiting periods of 0–14 days and benefits for up to two years, and long-term policies with waits of several weeks to months and benefits ranging from a few years to life. The writer's own long-term policy left three months without income. The account described replacing 50–70% of income and recommended saving for the deductible and unreplaced portion.
A 2007 US writer noted that disability cover might be available from the health insurer but had difficulty finding cover and warned that proving disability and handling substantial paperwork while ill made advance preparation useful. Reading terms before purchase is advisable, although the writer in the 2007 case had not received a policy before applying and paying money.
Continuing an employer's long-term disability policy may be possible by arranging to take over its premiums. A US freelance who left employment in 1989 did so despite initially having no verifiable freelance income, later increased cover when possible and had benefits for reduced earning capacity as well as complete disability. A 2017 US practitioner considered obtaining a new individual long-term policy difficult and recommended asking about continuation before leaving employment. A different account of a policy discussed at a 2009 US conference described benefits up to the holder's full current income after a disabling health event.
Life and long-term care cover
Life insurance is recommended particularly where young children depend on the freelance's income. In a 2009 US assessment, term life was considered relatively cost-effective and allowed remaining funds to be invested separately, while whole life was considered expensive with potentially limited investment options.
At a 2010 Pennsylvania meeting, a financial planner recommended considering life, disability and long-term care insurance; he estimated that 30% of people aged 30–64 would become disabled and that a year of disability could erode nearly ten years of savings. He recommended an inflation rider on long-term care insurance so benefits kept pace with costs, despite its expense, and buying cover as soon as affordable, especially after age 40.
General liability and equipment
General or business liability cover concerns bodily injury, property damage and personal injury rather than professional negligence. Examples include a delivery worker falling while bringing a business package, a car accident on the way to a meeting and an accident inside a client's premises. Client visits and frequent business driving increase exposure compared with wholly remote work and occasional deliveries.
At a 2010 Pennsylvania meeting, a lawyer considered a business delivery worker's fall on the premises a potential liability of up to $100,000 in medical bills in Philadelphia and recommended commercial general liability for corporations and LLCs or an umbrella extension to household cover. A home-based business should inform its household insurer and discuss suitable liability cover or a relatively inexpensive home-business rider. An umbrella policy can extend homeowner and motor liability cover.
A 2007 US account advised that homeowner or renter insurance probably would not cover home-office equipment, particularly equipment owned by the company. A rider specifically covering company-owned desks, chairs, computers, filing cabinets, copiers, printers, scanners and shredders could be cheaper than a separate company policy. For rented offices outside the home, the lease should be checked for cover and the landlord's building insurer asked for a quote, alongside competing quotes.
Professional indemnity and policy terms
Professional indemnity or errors-and-omissions insurance covers professional claims arising from negligence, errors or breaches of contractual terms. General business liability and professional errors-and-omissions cover are distinct kinds of insurance that clients may request. Before buying, the writer should establish what risk the client wants insured and whether the proposed policy fits it. In a 2015 case, a freelance bought a policy after a client's request without knowing whether the cover was appropriate, then asked a second prospective client what risks required cover and received no reply.
The writer considered indemnity unnecessary because work used client-supplied or published material and underwent later review and alteration beyond the writer’s control.
Three terms help interpret an indemnity quote:
- Premium: the price of cover, calculated from the risks of the professional activity.
- Limit of indemnity: the maximum covered during the policy period.
- Excess: the agreed amount borne by the insured on a claim before the insurer contributes the remainder within the indemnity limit.
Five possible reasons for carrying professional indemnity cover identified in 2022 are:
- It may be needed for recognition as a professional writer in some countries.
- A client may make it a contractual condition of collaboration.
- It protects against financial risks and time lost from work.
- It can give both parties peace of mind.
- It may signal professionalism and attract clients.
Five reasons against carrying it identified in 2022 are:
- Policies may not fit medical writing, and activities and risks differ between writers.
- Some writers consider themselves not liable for final document content.
- Insurers may struggle to understand medical writing and its risks.
- Complex clauses and terminology can require research or advice before purchase.
- It is a continuing cost that can become substantial over time.
The contract, type of work and client industry affect the decision, and an attorney should review accepted liability for medical content or resulting patient injury and advise on suitable insurance. A 2017 US practitioner described annual premiums of $500 to more than $1,500 for cover a writer might not need and advised ensuring the agent understood the actual work and liability accepted. Policy details should be checked for exclusions linked to implying medical expertise unsupported by degrees or credentials. Professional liability premiums can depend on gross billing, client types and use of subcontractors. Legal defence expenses may be covered even when the insured is ultimately exonerated, which can matter because defending a claim can itself damage a small business financially.
Different decisions about professional cover
Practitioners have reached different conclusions about professional indemnity. In the doctors' webinar from approximately 2018–2019, one doctor-turned-writer would not freelance without it and estimated an annual writing premium of about £200–£300 compared with £4,000–£5,000 for clinical practice. He considered employed agency writers covered by their agencies but freelancers responsible for their own arrangements, even though agencies or pharmaceutical clients would usually own and publish the work. A German freelance in the same discussion carried no indemnity policy because clients had not required it and it was locally uncommon and expensive; he understood the sponsor to bear ultimate document responsibility under good clinical practice and relied on extensive industry review.
In 2007, a US freelance mainly subcontracting to medical education, communications and advertising agencies reported usually being covered by client policies and carried no personal liability policy, while treating it as an individual decision rather than recommending against cover. Large companies' requirements for vendor errors-and-omissions cover were already creating demand. In a 2009 US case, a writer was considering errors-and-omissions cover despite carrying none, because good work could not prevent someone suing. In 2017, one US writer held business liability only because a large client insisted and had never held errors-and-omissions insurance, doubting its relevance to the work.
Another 2017 US view was that a non-bylined writer working from a client's materials and under its editorial control should not need product liability cover, while a named author writing from personal medical or scientific expertise should be properly insured. The practitioner considered errors-and-omissions cover historically most relevant to costly print or audiovisual production errors and believed it had broadened, but did not carry or plan to obtain it.
A contrasting 2017 US case involved buying professional and general liability policies to meet a pharmaceutical client's requirement, incorporating premiums into the estimate rather than separate invoice lines and retaining cover for other projects that year. The policies then enabled work for other large clients with the same requirements, with that work paying their cost.
In a 2017 US discussion reported in 2018, substantial professional and commercial liability cover was suggested as a possible way to continue contracting with a company that otherwise wanted the writer on its payroll. In that account, Cathryn D. Evans declined expensive cover and liability clauses because pharmaceutical and biotechnology clients dictated the material, supplied the data and controlled the final outcome; her attorney-approved contract wording reflected that position. Melissa Bogen, an editor and sole proprietor, carried no work-specific insurance and removed insurance clauses, considering herself not responsible for later treatment of the work while recognising that medical writers could face different circumstances.
What the 2021 polls found
Polls of EMWA's LinkedIn group and November 2021 Freelance Business Forum participants found 49% of 49 respondents had professional indemnity cover and 51% did not. A 2014 survey had reported cover among 43% of medical communications freelances, and the 2021 discussion suggested cover was common among freelance medical translators. Some writers without it had never been asked for it, while others preferred collaborations without an insurance requirement.
Asked what they would do if a new client required cover, 64% of 50 respondents would obtain it, 30% would ask to remove the clause, none would disregard the requirement and sign, and 6% chose another answer. Only 21% of 50 respondents said they had previously asked for removal. Refusing cover could mean losing work, although some clients were flexible. Requirements were reported particularly from large UK clients, including contract research organisations and medical communications agencies, and publicly funded US bodies. Removal might be impossible if an agency's own agreement with its end client required all subcontractors to be insured.
Among 40 respondents asked about responsibility and liability for final content, 50% named the client, 32.5% said it depended on the work, 10% named the freelance and 7.5% did not know. Arguments against liability included the writer not signing off the final document, shared work by writers, data checkers, editors and expert reviewers, and the writer often never seeing the final product. No respondent reported ever facing a claim. The decision remains dependent on the business, services, risks and client requirements, with the fine print needing attention before purchase.