I recently saw in a client's file a physician's brief handwritten note on a prescription pad saying my client was disabled. It wasn't something I had requested. I used to see that sort of note all the time but it's been a while since I've seen one.
9 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Prob cause most of your claimants lately haven't been disabled
6:56 That is just uncalled for. I hope you are not an Agency employee. However, I will say that hand written notes scribbled on RX pads are not given much credence these days. At one point, they were pretty common but now, not so much. Sign of the times that it is expected that such "notes" will be typed letters or completed MSS forms at the least.
I think most doctors don't use prescription pads any longer; it is done electronically, in some format. Also, trend has been to insist that any "opinion" in any format be addressed in ALJ decision. Even such a handwritten conclusory statement reserved to the Commissioner must be mentioned, and likely given no weight. Failure to mention this can be cuase for a remand.
A finding of disability is a legal finding here in SSA land, one which a physician is not qualified to make. What I tell the rare physician I encounter who asks me what SSA looks for, what they should say, etc. is that the agency depends on treating sources to provide detailed accounts of the person's symptomology and the limitations (mental and physical) stemming from them, in vocationally-relevant terms if possible (e.g., the claimant has severe osteoarthritis in his knees, which causes severe pain when he is on his feet longer than about 30 minutes).
SSA doesn't need anyone to tell us the Cl is or is not disabled. SSA needs experts in various fields (medicine, psychology, vocational areas, etc.) to give it the facts and opinions they are uniquely qualified to give so that it can make the legal determinations it is uniquely qualified to make.
I would rather have a note saying how long they can sit, stand, lift/carry and if they can sustain a 40 hour work week 50 weeks out of the year without the condition causing more problems. The script note goes mostly ingnored these days, but an RFC is hard to come by with most doctors.
The Rx note saying disability is superfluous in that instance. A statement of "he/she is disabled" without specific limitations or even references to the limiting symptoms underlying that conclusion is worthless. It would be the treatment notes and what they contain that justify the finding of disability in your example--the conclusory assertion of disability brings nothing to the table.
1:12, it certainly should be a smoking gun that the physician has notes that support disability or if not, the physician has no credibility and we go from there. Findings of disability from the treating physician may very easily be used to keep the claimant from working at his current job or assist him in a worker's comp case or private disability insurance, or even personal injury case. It will not be used in an SSA case as such because our definitions are so very different and often times confusing and wrong...
9 comments:
Prob cause most of your claimants lately haven't been disabled
6:56 That is just uncalled for. I hope you are not an Agency employee. However, I will say that hand written notes scribbled on RX pads are not given much credence these days. At one point, they were pretty common but now, not so much. Sign of the times that it is expected that such "notes" will be typed letters or completed MSS forms at the least.
I think most doctors don't use prescription pads any longer; it is done electronically, in some format. Also, trend has been to insist that any "opinion" in any format be addressed in ALJ decision. Even such a handwritten conclusory statement reserved to the Commissioner must be mentioned, and likely given no weight. Failure to mention this can be cuase for a remand.
A finding of disability is a legal finding here in SSA land, one which a physician is not qualified to make. What I tell the rare physician I encounter who asks me what SSA looks for, what they should say, etc. is that the agency depends on treating sources to provide detailed accounts of the person's symptomology and the limitations (mental and physical) stemming from them, in vocationally-relevant terms if possible (e.g., the claimant has severe osteoarthritis in his knees, which causes severe pain when he is on his feet longer than about 30 minutes).
SSA doesn't need anyone to tell us the Cl is or is not disabled. SSA needs experts in various fields (medicine, psychology, vocational areas, etc.) to give it the facts and opinions they are uniquely qualified to give so that it can make the legal determinations it is uniquely qualified to make.
I would rather have a note saying how long they can sit, stand, lift/carry and if they can sustain a 40 hour work week 50 weeks out of the year without the condition causing more problems. The script note goes mostly ingnored these days, but an RFC is hard to come by with most doctors.
If the Rx says disabled and the treating notes support it, you got it. That is all that is required.
The Rx note saying disability is superfluous in that instance. A statement of "he/she is disabled" without specific limitations or even references to the limiting symptoms underlying that conclusion is worthless. It would be the treatment notes and what they contain that justify the finding of disability in your example--the conclusory assertion of disability brings nothing to the table.
1:12, it certainly should be a smoking gun that the physician has notes that support disability or if not, the physician has no credibility and we go from there. Findings of disability from the treating physician may very easily be used to keep the claimant from working at his current job or assist him in a worker's comp case or private disability insurance, or even personal injury case. It will not be used in an SSA case as such because our definitions are so very different and often times confusing and wrong...
@6:56
Lulz
Post a Comment