Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2013
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Contingencies	Note 13 - Contingencies In the ordinary course of its businesses, the Company is involved in legal proceedings, including lawsuits, regulatory examinations and inquiries. Except with regard to the matter discussed below, based on currently available information, the Company does not believe that it is reasonably possible that any of its pending legal proceedings will have a material effect on the Company’s financial statements. Certain state insurance regulators, legislators and treasurers are involved in an array of initiatives that could result in significant changes to unclaimed property laws and claims handling practices with respect to life insurance policies. These initiatives seek, in various ways, to impose a new duty on the part of life insurers to proactively search for deaths of their insureds prior to the submission of death claims by the insureds’ beneficiaries as required under standard life insurance policy forms. Legislation enacted in Kentucky, New York, Maryland, Montana and Alabama, with varying effective dates between January 1, 2013 and January 1, 2014, require life insurers to compare their in-force policy records on a regular basis against the database of reported deaths maintained by the Social Security Administration (the “SSA Death Master File”). Legislation of this type has also been introduced and is pending in Massachusetts, Nevada, North Dakota, Rhode Island and Vermont. One state, New Mexico, has enacted legislation that also requires in-force policy record comparisons, but exempts life insurers, like the Company, that have not previously utilized the SSA Death Master File, and instead, only requires that such companies conduct SSA Death Master File comparisons for policies and contracts issued and delivered in New Mexico after the legislation’s July 1, 2013 effective date. An amendment to Alabama's previously-enacted statute referenced above has been passed by the Alabama House of Representatives and is pending in the Senate. If enacted, this amendment will limit the policies required to be compared against the SSA Death Master File only to policies issued on or after January 1, 2016. The Company cannot predict whether or when other states will introduce or enact legislation of the types described above, or the exact form or approach that such legislation might take. In November 2012, the Company filed a declaratory judgment action in state court in Kentucky asking the court to construe the Kentucky Unclaimed Life Insurance Benefit Act (the “Kentucky Act,” one of the enacted statutes referenced above) such that it would only apply prospectively -- i.e., only with respect to those life insurance policies issued on or after the effective date of the Kentucky Act -- consistent with what the Company believes are the requirements of applicable Kentucky statutory law and Kentucky and federal constitutional provisions. On April 1, 2013, the trial court denied the Company’s motion for summary judgment and held that the requirements of the Kentucky Act applied to life insurance policies issued before the Kentucky Act’s effective date. The Company believes that the court did not correctly apply governing law and has appealed the trial court’s decision to the Kentucky Court of Appeals, which has issued a stay of enforcement of the Kentucky Act against the Company under the emergency relief rules of such Court. The Company does not expect the outcome of this appeal to be known for a considerable amount of time, and likely not before the second half of 2014. Kemper’s life insurance companies are currently the subject of an unclaimed property compliance examination by a private firm retained by the treasurers of thirty-eight states. Such companies are also the subject of a market conduct exam by one state insurance regulator for the purpose of verifying such companies’ compliance with relevant regulations governing life insurance claims handling and unclaimed property practices. The results of these examinations cannot presently be predicted. The Company continues to maintain that states lack authority to establish new requirements that have the effect of changing the terms of existing life insurance contracts in the ways described above. If state officials are successful in applying such new requirements retroactively to existing life insurance policies, it will fundamentally alter the responsibilities of the parties to such contracts by effectively eliminating contract terms that condition claim settlement and payment on the receipt of “due proof of death” of an insured. The outcome of the various state initiatives could have a significant effect on, including acceleration of, the payment and/or escheatment of policy benefits and significantly increase claims handling costs. The Company cannot reasonably estimate the amount of loss, if any, that the Company would recognize if it were subjected to such requirements on a retroactive basis.

Note 13 - Contingencies

In the ordinary course of its businesses, the Company is involved in legal proceedings, including lawsuits, regulatory examinations and inquiries. Except with regard to the matter discussed below, based on currently available information, the Company does not believe that it is reasonably possible that any of its pending legal proceedings will have a material effect on the Company’s financial statements.

Certain state insurance regulators, legislators and treasurers are involved in an array of initiatives that could result in significant changes to unclaimed property laws and claims handling practices with respect to life insurance policies. These initiatives seek, in various ways, to impose a new duty on the part of life insurers to proactively search for deaths of their insureds prior to the submission of death claims by the insureds’ beneficiaries as required under standard life insurance policy forms.

Legislation enacted in Kentucky, New York, Maryland, Montana and Alabama, with varying effective dates between January 1, 2013 and January 1, 2014, require life insurers to compare their in-force policy records on a regular basis against the database of reported deaths maintained by the Social Security Administration (the “SSA Death Master File”). Legislation of this type has also been introduced and is pending in Massachusetts, Nevada, North Dakota, Rhode Island and Vermont. One state, New Mexico, has enacted legislation that also requires in-force policy record comparisons, but exempts life insurers, like the Company, that have not previously utilized the SSA Death Master File, and instead, only requires that such companies conduct SSA Death Master File comparisons for policies and contracts issued and delivered in New Mexico after the legislation’s July 1, 2013 effective date. An amendment to Alabama's previously-enacted statute referenced above has been passed by the Alabama House of Representatives and is pending in the Senate. If enacted, this amendment will limit the policies required to be compared against the SSA Death Master File only to policies issued on or after January 1, 2016. The Company cannot predict whether or when other states will introduce or enact legislation of the types described above, or the exact form or approach that such legislation might take.

In November 2012, the Company filed a declaratory judgment action in state court in Kentucky asking the court to construe the Kentucky Unclaimed Life Insurance Benefit Act (the “Kentucky Act,” one of the enacted statutes referenced above) such that it would only apply prospectively -- i.e., only with respect to those life insurance policies issued on or after the effective date of the Kentucky Act -- consistent with what the Company believes are the requirements of applicable Kentucky statutory law and Kentucky and federal constitutional provisions. On April 1, 2013, the trial court denied the Company’s motion for summary judgment and held that the requirements of the Kentucky Act applied to life insurance policies issued before the Kentucky Act’s effective date. The Company believes that the court did not correctly apply governing law and has appealed the trial court’s decision to the Kentucky Court of Appeals, which has issued a stay of enforcement of the Kentucky Act against the Company under the emergency relief rules of such Court. The Company does not expect the outcome of this appeal to be known for a considerable amount of time, and likely not before the second half of 2014.

Kemper’s life insurance companies are currently the subject of an unclaimed property compliance examination by a private firm retained by the treasurers of thirty-eight states. Such companies are also the subject of a market conduct exam by one state insurance regulator for the purpose of verifying such companies’ compliance with relevant regulations governing life insurance claims handling and unclaimed property practices. The results of these examinations cannot presently be predicted.

The Company continues to maintain that states lack authority to establish new requirements that have the effect of changing the terms of existing life insurance contracts in the ways described above. If state officials are successful in applying such new requirements retroactively to existing life insurance policies, it will fundamentally alter the responsibilities of the parties to such contracts by effectively eliminating contract terms that condition claim settlement and payment on the receipt of “due proof of death” of an insured. The outcome of the various state initiatives could have a significant effect on, including acceleration of, the payment and/or escheatment of policy benefits and significantly increase claims handling costs. The Company cannot reasonably estimate the amount of loss, if any, that the Company would recognize if it were subjected to such requirements on a retroactive basis.