In addition to partially duplicating and to some extent contradicting Social Security's Listing of Impairments, the additions to the Compassionate Allowance list announced yesterday won't even be effective until August 13, 2012, a point that was not mentioned in the press release. What was the point of announcing a policy that won't even be in effect for more than three months?
Once Social Security gets a new Commissioner next year this whole compassionate allowance thing needs to get folded into the Listings. That's what the Listings are for. If the Listings were inadequate, they should have been amended. There was no need to add another layer on top of the Listings. It's just confusing to those who have to administer the program.
6 comments:
The Compassionate Allowance initiative is a public relations effort. And though it makes for good press, it actually disadvantages other claimants while providing minimal benefit to those with the listed conditions. Applicants with these conditions have always been allowed and, in general, have had their claims processed very quickly because they are straightforward and do not involve vocational issues and other complicating factors. But the State DDSs are required to spend extra labor pursuing documentation more quickly on the CA cases. That means that less DDS labor is available to be spent on the non-CA cases. And for the Title II applicants, getting an allowance decision earlier, if still within waiting period, is of little benefit.
You know what would really put the compassion back in compassionate allowances? Eliminating those pesky 5-month waiting periods.
Think about it. If you're going to be dead in 6-12 months, why should the SSA continue to withhold 5 months of your benefits? I've had CA cases where the claimant died before the waiting period ran out. It's such a stupid, arcane rule, especially in these CA cases. Realistically, like the first person said, it's really just a PR stunt.
I'd rather see them expand the compassionate allowances and get rid of the listings.
The listings are frankly useless. A complete waste of time having to address them in every opinion, where few if any claimants ever actually meet their criteria. Most of the time when a judge wants you to write a decision that a claimant meets a listing, there is never sufficient med evidence to support their criteria, which forces you to say they meet it even though there's no supporting evidence, or (most of the time) you make it less than sedentary.
Compassionate allowance, listing, less than sedentary, etc etc....what difference does it make if the claimant is dead before any benefits can be paid?
In most routine cases (i.e. non-TERI) I guess that claimants meet listings maybe 2-3% of the time. But that doesn't mean you eliminate the listings altogether. If 2% of claims were denied for SGA, you wouldn't remove the SGA requirements would you?
PR stunt, indeed. Any medical condition is covered in the Listings anyway; there's always a catch-all listing.
It's unfortunate that most of SSAs time and dollars are used up in denial cases for those who can't or won't find a job.
Anon 8:17 I hope you don't mean to imply that any claimant who is not a TERI case is a waste of time layabout who is unemployed more than disabled....There's a very wide chasm between TERI cases and the losers who just don't want to work, and there are many, many truly disabled people in that chasm.
Post a Comment