Autoerotic asphyxiation, while rare and often misunderstood, does not typically fall under the “intentionally self-inflicted injury” exclusion found in many life and accidental death insurance policies. The reason is simple: the intent is pleasure—not harm. And in the law, intent matters.
Claim Denied After an Unusual Loss? You’re Not Alone
Losing a loved one is always devastating. But when the circumstances of that death involve something society deems taboo—such as autoerotic asphyxiation—grief becomes layered with embarrassment, confusion, and often silence.
It’s in that silence that life insurance companies thrive. They rely on beneficiaries feeling too shocked or ashamed to fight back. If your claim has been denied and you’re being told that your loved one caused their own death, you may feel helpless. But the law is more nuanced than insurers would like you to believe—and many denials can be overturned.
Understanding the Self-Inflicted Harm Exclusion
Many life insurance and accidental death policies contain a clause that excludes coverage if the insured dies due to an “intentionally self-inflicted injury.” These clauses are sometimes in effect for only the first two years of the policy, while others apply indefinitely.
Insurers use this exclusion to deny claims where the policyholder’s actions resulted in their own death—even if the death was unintentional. The key phrase here is intentionally self-inflicted. That is, the person must have taken an action with the goal of harming themselves, even if death was not the intended outcome.
In some circumstances, the exclusion makes sense. If a person takes poison to get sick and accidentally dies, that could reasonably be viewed as an intentionally self-inflicted injury. The person meant to cause harm—just not death.
But that’s not the case with autoerotic asphyxiation.
Autoerotic Asphyxiation Is Not Self-Harm
Autoerotic asphyxiation (AEA) is a risky, yet deliberate and practiced behavior used to heighten sexual arousal through oxygen deprivation. It may involve ropes, nooses, neckties, plastic bags, or other devices to limit blood and oxygen flow to the brain. The act is not intended to harm—but to enhance.
When properly executed, the individual passes out, and their body weight or positioning allows for the oxygen restriction to cease. The process is designed to be temporary. Deaths that occur are unintended and accidental.
And in the eyes of the law, that distinction is crucial.
What the Courts Say About Autoerotic Asphyxiation and Insurance Claims
In one pivotal case heard by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, a man died in the back of a van from what the coroner ruled was accidental autoerotic asphyxiation. There were no significant injuries, no evidence of suicidal ideation, and no intent to harm. The life insurance company denied the claim, citing the self-inflicted harm exclusion.
The court, however, disagreed.
It found that the act of oxygen restriction—performed for sexual gratification—was not done with the intent to cause harm. The accidental death, though tragic, didn’t trigger the exclusion. There were no injuries, no malice, and no intention beyond pleasure. As a result, the court ordered the insurer to pay out the full death benefit.
This case set an important precedent, but insurers continue to issue denials based on this same flawed argument. That’s why experienced legal help is critical.
Why Insurance Companies Keep Getting It Wrong
Despite existing case law and common sense, life insurers often default to policy exclusions like “intentionally self-inflicted injury” or “suicide” in AEA cases. They do this because:
The cause of death is stigmatized and confusing to beneficiaries
Most families lack the legal expertise to challenge their reading of the policy
The emotional weight of the situation discourages survivors from taking action
In short, it’s easier and cheaper for insurers to deny these claims and hope no one pushes back. But when challenged properly, these denials often fall apart under legal scrutiny.
Your Rights After a Denied AEA Claim
If your loved one died during an incident involving autoerotic asphyxiation and your claim has been denied, here’s what you need to know:
You do not have to accept the denial at face value
You have the right to appeal, challenge, and litigate the insurer’s interpretation
These cases are winnable with the right strategy, evidence, and legal counsel
We’ve successfully handled numerous AEA-related denial cases, including those involving self-inflicted harm clauses. We understand how to build a strong legal argument based on intention, case precedent, and policy language.
Why You Need a Lawyer Who Handles Life Insurance Denials
General attorneys often don’t understand the medical, legal, and psychological nuances of autoerotic asphyxiation claims. But we do. This is a core part of our practice. If you need help with denied life insurance in California call us.
We bring:
Years of experience litigating complex claim denials
Access to respected forensic and insurance experts
Deep knowledge of policy language and insurance defense strategies
Compassion and confidentiality every step of the way
We’ll take over all communication with the insurance company, build your case, and fight for the payout your loved one intended you to receive. You don’t pay us a dime unless we win.
There’s No Shame in Seeking Justice
Deaths involving sexual behavior, like AEA, are still deaths caused by accidents—not intentional acts of harm. Don’t let an insurance company twist the facts or exploit your grief. You are entitled to full legal representation, and your loved one’s legacy deserves to be protected.
We’ve never lost an AEA case. If your claim has been denied, contact us today for a free, confidential consultation.