tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post3466675802072971600..comments2024-03-29T02:05:50.350-04:00Comments on Social Security News: Look What Happened After The GOP Took Over The HouseUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger52125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-74193101057685491102015-12-13T19:34:42.327-05:002015-12-13T19:34:42.327-05:00@ 8:18 Amen!@ 8:18 Amen!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-69109819523516493362015-12-12T15:08:00.357-05:002015-12-12T15:08:00.357-05:00how often are you using MEs??? I guess the office...how often are you using MEs??? I guess the offices I have worked/been in are anomalies (or yours is?) because I would guess the ALJs I see use MEs at a rate of somewhere between 5 and 10 percent, and the number is definitely closer to 5.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-61126704717767137022015-12-11T20:18:10.354-05:002015-12-11T20:18:10.354-05:00James 2:13 For judgment will be merciless to one ...James 2:13 For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-4581514766432567892015-12-11T18:28:47.052-05:002015-12-11T18:28:47.052-05:00@3:28 That ALJ will have to answer to God if he is...@3:28 That ALJ will have to answer to God if he is cherry picking ME's to issue denials. May God have mercy on his soul.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-73716555849288332672015-12-11T15:28:37.186-05:002015-12-11T15:28:37.186-05:00Nice point @3:11PM about the change in ME behavior...Nice point @3:11PM about the change in ME behavior. Its just one of many ways for the Agency to rig the system against the claimants. <br /><br />I had a recent off the record discussion with an ALJ who frankly told me he did not like a particular ME because the ME frequently testified that claimants met a listing. So the ALJ was trying to avoid using that particular ME. We have other cases where the same ME (who never provides testimony favorable to a claimant) seems to be called time and time again by a particular ALJ but no other ALJs in the office. <br /><br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-22455750496001740292015-12-11T15:11:22.639-05:002015-12-11T15:11:22.639-05:00"Someone mentioned that higher paying ALJs we..."Someone mentioned that higher paying ALJs were being forced to pay less. Not really. SSA never tells an ALJ how to decide a case, and I fully believe that. What SSA mgmt. DOES do is enforce production demands and, more recently, policy compliance and legal defensibility in decisions."<br /><br />Wrong. ALJs have told me off the record there has been pressure off the record to deny. <br /><br />Also, we have caught some MEs listing less. There was an ME who basically listed 70 percent of his cases prior to 2011. Now it's about 30 percent. Why? The ME is a lawyer and somebody told him he was not looking at the listings right.<br /><br />My problem with this is two-fold. Fine if you want to go after the high-granting ALJs. On the flip side, you need to talk to the lower granting ALJs (lower than 40 percent). Both sides may not be looking at the evidence entirely.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-42963787657564808422015-12-10T13:09:47.969-05:002015-12-10T13:09:47.969-05:00Per DSM 5, p,34 regarding individuals with mild in...Per DSM 5, p,34 regarding individuals with mild intellectual disability: "In adulthood, competitive employment is often seen in jobs that do not emphasize conceptual skills." Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-62399059861621359202015-12-10T13:02:51.513-05:002015-12-10T13:02:51.513-05:00@ 12:10PM. It would be very case specific. I hav...@ 12:10PM. It would be very case specific. I have previously used records showing placement in "EMR" classes (without having IQs in the work record), having to explain to the ALJ that EMR referred to educable mentally retarded.<br /><br />A 16 year work record would not preclude a finding of deficits in adaptive deficits. Work is only one of several areas of functioning to look at and the circumstances of the work obviously make a difference. I have a client who has worked his entire life for a family owned business and has received accommodations in his work the entire time. Now that he has developed a secondary severe impairment, he would satisfy the Listing under 12.05C.<br /><br />The whole premise of 12.05C is that an IQ of 70 or below would not by itself be disabling but when coupled with a secondary severe impairment that further limits the ability to function in work it is deemed so. So working in the absence of a secondary severe impairment is not inconsistent with the Listing at all. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-70569309379843246942015-12-10T12:10:52.920-05:002015-12-10T12:10:52.920-05:0010:16 noted, "Thus in a case where the only I...10:16 noted, "Thus in a case where the only IQs are after age 22, but there is evidence of adaptive deficits before age 22, the Listing could still be met." And just what would you use to document and support adaptive deficits prior to age 22?? Especially when 20 years later they have a 16 year work record??<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-14391771825498737942015-12-10T11:55:27.254-05:002015-12-10T11:55:27.254-05:00Or it could be that ALJ's and writers are misi...Or it could be that ALJ's and writers are misinterpreting the Listings like @9:56AM. I'm sure there are a whole host of factors at work here from just coding things differently, ALJs finding new ways to approve claims while avoiding the scrutiny that comes with 12.05, to a decrease in psych CEs being ordered by DDS. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-60139454136755490332015-12-10T10:39:41.544-05:002015-12-10T10:39:41.544-05:00Perhaps the economy has something to do with it. ...Perhaps the economy has something to do with it. Maybe the allowance rates were highest in 2010 because we were at the peak of the Great Recession. As the economy has improved, some with mild ID have been able to find work. Many people with an IQ in the high 60s are able to work at simple, unskilled jobs. Also, I believe most people would rather work if they can.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-73060072056181920552015-12-10T10:16:18.715-05:002015-12-10T10:16:18.715-05:00@ 9:56AM. I take issue with your suggestion that 1...@ 9:56AM. I take issue with your suggestion that 12.05 requires that the IQ be obtained before age 22. The Listing actually says "deficits in adaptive functioning initially manifested during the developmental period; i.e., the evidence demonstrates or supports onset of the impairment before age 22." Nowhere does it say that there has to be IQ scores obtained before age 22. Thus in a case where the only IQs are after age 22, but there is evidence of adaptive deficits before age 22, the Listing could still be met.<br /><br />You would be imposing an additional requirement that is not present in the Listing by requiring IQs before age 22. <br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-56352747840678932362015-12-10T09:56:27.310-05:002015-12-10T09:56:27.310-05:00The law is the law. There are 4 steps to meeting ...The law is the law. There are 4 steps to meeting Listing 12.05. One, an IQ of 70 or below. Two, obtained before the claimant turned 22. Three, with deficits in adaptive functioning. And, four, with an additional severe impairment.<br /><br />Before quality review initiatives, the representative bar persuaded many ALJs that Listing 12.05C had but two requirements: an IQ of 70 or below, and an additional severe impairment.<br /><br />Now that the law is back in play, the deficits in adaptive functioning, and the IQ score established before age 22, must once again be proven.<br /><br />You could argue that the quality review initiative came about as a defense against Darrell Issa (and his successor, Jason Chaffetz).<br /><br />However, the fact that Listing 12.05C has four prongs, not two, should be a universal fact, not subject to representative or ALJ whimsy. Decisional independence doesn't allow one to cut a Listing in half, does it?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-62333864465681959262015-12-09T18:21:14.861-05:002015-12-09T18:21:14.861-05:00Perhaps...but I think too much finger pointing goe...Perhaps...but I think too much finger pointing goes on from all parties with very little presentation of viable solutions. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-85977143288915217162015-12-09T17:21:10.587-05:002015-12-09T17:21:10.587-05:00The collapse of the GOP is coming. To attack socia...The collapse of the GOP is coming. To attack social security was the final straw, and this is the main reason why Trump is leading the GOP by a landslide.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-50726587327495772852015-12-09T14:07:25.231-05:002015-12-09T14:07:25.231-05:00Ouch 10:22, kinda mean comment towards 7:49 anonOuch 10:22, kinda mean comment towards 7:49 anonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-66235151942954136582015-12-09T10:22:58.913-05:002015-12-09T10:22:58.913-05:00You probably shouldn't. If you're as smart...You probably shouldn't. If you're as smart as you think you are, you can figure out when to keep your opinions to yourself. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-41059625868233981332015-12-09T07:49:48.323-05:002015-12-09T07:49:48.323-05:00@ 8:09PM....When I can make more money just in EAJ...@ 8:09PM....When I can make more money just in EAJA fees alone than any writer's salary, that sure says a lot about the quality of the writing. I probably shouldn't complain though. And the district court work is just an adjunct part of my practice. Keep up the good work! Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-1966344087783362612015-12-09T00:29:57.740-05:002015-12-09T00:29:57.740-05:00@ 9:59
I also wonder why SSA chose to structure O...@ 9:59<br /><br />I also wonder why SSA chose to structure ODAR such that an ALJ is the highest management official in a hearing office. I've heard they did it to mimic an Article III judge's chambers, but that doesn't make sense since...well, that one pretty much writes itself, doesn't it?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-20856173345754612015-12-08T21:59:55.382-05:002015-12-08T21:59:55.382-05:00Aljs are insecure about maintaining their perch on...Aljs are insecure about maintaining their perch on the ODAR pecking order and engage in denigrating writers because they know that their duties as aljs are at a much lower level of complexity than those of ALJs in other agencies throughout the federal government. ALJs at other agencies know it, SSA aljs know it, and writers know it. It is the big elephant in the room. SSA aljs are a costly burden to the taxpayer. Why should we pay SSA aljs - who decide non-adversarial disability cases with largely uncomplicated legal issues - the same salary as SEC ALJs deciding complex contested securities cases or FTC ALJs deciding complicated trust busting issues?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-65388160279917544472015-12-08T20:09:23.961-05:002015-12-08T20:09:23.961-05:00...yeah, couldn't be smart enough to be an awe......yeah, couldn't be smart enough to be an awesome disability attorney trying to win a case to take 25% of someone's money for filling out forms...now there's a career!!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-26022072403137311702015-12-08T17:19:26.443-05:002015-12-08T17:19:26.443-05:00I just love how decision writers are so full of th...I just love how decision writers are so full of themselves here. If you guys and gals were such legal scholars, you wouldn't have ended up working as a writer for ODAR unless you have other deficiencies, like perhaps serious personality flaws. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-80512819097202398912015-12-08T17:08:44.516-05:002015-12-08T17:08:44.516-05:00Someone mentioned that higher paying ALJs were bei...Someone mentioned that higher paying ALJs were being forced to pay less. Not really. SSA never tells an ALJ how to decide a case, and I fully believe that. What SSA mgmt. DOES do is enforce production demands and, more recently, policy compliance and legal defensibility in decisions.<br /><br />As a former writer, it never ceases to amaze me how ALJs complain about their judicial independence being impeded by production quotas, having to make all legal findings charged under the regs and other binding policy in their instructions, having to follow the law in their decision making, etc. etc. In about 99.9999% of cases, there is ample evidence to jump over the "substantial evidence" burden hurdle and support a well-reasoned, policy-compliant decision for FF, UF, or PF. <br /><br />Not that this is appropriate, but if ALJ X wanted to pay/deny a claim, he or she has plenty of evidence to do so within the bounds of the law in almost all their cases. So to hear ALJs complain that not being able to have an RFC that is simply "cannot sustain any work activity over an 8-hour day/40-hour workweek" (how hard is it to just list the few limitations that led you to that conclusion???) or some such encroaches on their judicial independence...sheesh, with minimal effort (you could always enlist your writers for help, too) you can get a policy compliant decision that makes pretty much whatever ultimate conclusion you'd like.<br /><br />So to go back to my original point, those formerly high payers--my guess is that many of them are older ALJs who never learned the law and, rather than do so and put a little more effort into their decision making, gave up on paying as many cases as they would like to avoid the staff of SSA mgmt.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-50710296635119077712015-12-08T16:58:59.385-05:002015-12-08T16:58:59.385-05:00@ 5:31
lolol, that's rich. Anecdotally, thou...@ 5:31<br /><br />lolol, that's rich. Anecdotally, though, I will say that in my office, more than half our attorneys know the law INFINITELY more than all but one or two of our ALJs. I doubt we are unique in that manner. <br /><br />Also, I am reminded of--Voltaire I believe it was--who said: "I can add two and two as well as God." Who cares if ALJs are higher on the pecking order? I can read the law as well as them. We aren't talking super nuanced stuff, but like making sure a job meets the three criteria to be PRW. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-14629127808732568452015-12-08T16:55:03.708-05:002015-12-08T16:55:03.708-05:00@ 10:47
"jeopardize a lifetime gig" umm...@ 10:47<br /><br />"<b>jeopardize</b> a <b>lifetime</b> gig" ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm<br /><br />May I explain to you the phenomenon of cognitive dissonance?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com