Jun 1, 2011

Rejected Disability Applicants Earn Less Before Applying

 From a press release issued by the University of Nebraska-Lincoln:
Male disability applicants rejected for federal benefits tend to have lower earnings and labor force participation rates over the decade prior to applying for federal disability benefits, a new study finds. 

Rejected applicants also work less despite being in better health than accepted applicants, according to the research led by economist Seth Giertz of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

On average, the study found, those rejected for benefits made 8.5 percent less than beneficiaries six years before applying – and nearly 22 percent less just prior to application. Also, applicants who were rejected left the workforce faster as their application dates approached than those who were approved for benefits.

The findings suggest that many of the rejections may have been because applicants were not entirely motivated by health reasons when seeking disability.
Another possible interpretation of this data is that rejected applicants suffer more from undiagnosed and untreated, perhaps untreatable, health problems, such as chronic psychiatric illness, including substance abuse, and mild to borderline mental retardation. These health problems are generally life-long and have made these applicants a marginal part of the labor force throughout their lives.

That is the problem with disability research. The data is real but the interpretations are often questionable and have more to do with the researchers' political and social views than anything else.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

many rejected applicants are also incarcerated...thereby, they are earning zero for significant periods of time.

This is consistent with that study because convicted criminals are predominantly male.

Anonymous said...

Rejected applicants over-all are younger than accepted ones, which would also account for why they made less six years before their application. Those younger applicants would indeed be in better health than the older accepted ones. I agree that those points were left out due to the "researchers' political and social views".

Anonymous said...

malingering?

Anonymous said...

Drugs?

Anonymous said...

reduce it to one applicant.

(1) if they are approved on the first application,

or

(2) they are approved on the nth application.

In both cases, they are approved on the "oldest age" application that they have filed !!!

And, of course, no one files an application after they are being paid for the some benefits (excluding disabled SSI mothers).