Your question is: What's going on here and how does this relate to a Social Security disability claim?
 |
| Hints: This has nothing to do with swelling or manual dexterity. |
And the answer is that this unfortunate 20 year old man had just been released from a psychiatric hospital. His regular shoelaces had been taken from him as a suicide prevention measure. He's had many psychiatric hospitalizations because his schizoaffective disorder causes command auditory hallucinations. Yet, Social Security twice denied his disability claim and he had to go to a hearing. Can anyone explain why Social Security denies disability claims like this?
Mentally incapable, as shown by inability to tie shoes?
ReplyDeletePossibly someone who is suicidal and would not be able to suffocate themselves with these laces.
ReplyDeleteSomeone standing in a long line at an SSA office?
ReplyDeleteWaited so long for a hearing he lost all his money and can't afford shoelaces.
ReplyDeleteCan't afford diabetic shoes and is denied for being non-compliant with prescribed treatment.
ReplyDeleteHaving "laces" which will stay tight even if only pulled through using bumps would suggest functional loss of an one upper extremity.
ReplyDeleteAlternatively, they could be meant to allow tying of shoes while avoiding diabetic nerve pain but I think my first conclusion is more likely the case.
Looks to me like it is someone who can put on his shoes and leave the house, and is therefore capable of medium exertion.
ReplyDeleteThe professional attire worn by the SSA employee?
ReplyDeletePrison shoes
ReplyDeleteThe person has edema from uncontrolled blood pressure/kidney failure or is dealing with diabetic nerve pain?
ReplyDeleteBecause in the "Aim for 40%" there must be sacrificial lambs!"
ReplyDeleteMy response was deleted shortly after posting. Is there a glitch, or is Charles editing the comments section?
ReplyDeleteNo answer on the shoe thing, but does anyone know when ERE will be back up?
ReplyDelete@6:51 good to know I am not the only one.
ReplyDeleteAnswer is just below the picture. Mr. Hall edited it in.
...because everyone is disabled...everyone
ReplyDeleteHe was denied because he is only 20 yrs old. Not disabled if they let him out of the looney bin
ReplyDeleteI've run across some adjudicators for whom it was clear that they just didn't get some important concept about the law or medicine that is critical general knowledge to have to adequately adjudicate claims. Those cases are appealed and often granted at the ALJ level, but you wonder how many other claimants will be forced to do the same until someone within the system does something to correct the root of the problem. The problem contributes to the hearing level backlog. If all the records were in on a psychotic schizophrenic with command hallucinations and many hospitalizations,then obviously people adjudicating initial and reconsideration claims screwed up and have some important knowledge or skill gap that is resulting in a lot of extra work for the hearing offices. Is there a method for ALJs or reps to request that certain adjudicators get retraining and be monitored when the problem is that obvious?
ReplyDeleteThese cases are often denied at the ALJ level also, far too often. There are too many ALJs denying 75% + of the cases they hear and too many AC denials now over 85%. It is not just a problem with adjudicators at the lower levels. Far more reprehensible are these ALJ outliers and AC personnel who have abandoned the oath they took to be fair and impartial for 100 -200K salaries. Seeing this first hand is one of the most disgusting experiences anyone in this field encounters.
ReplyDeleteI don't tie my shoes, don't zip my pants, don't wear a belt so my pants on the ground, wear my hat backward, always have my hoodie up even in summer, and talk like I don't got no education because I got none. So give me my check. I earned it!
ReplyDeleteThere is also clearly a bias against psychological only disability claimants. Many ALJ's treat them as nuisances or mere "crazies" that don't deserve the same treatment as truly disabled people ie those with physical impairments. It's like Rand Paul said everybody has a little anxiety about getting up and going to work.
ReplyDeleteNoncompliance with medical treatment, if he's better when he's on his meds but stops taking them when he feels better and keeps relapsing.
ReplyDeleteIt's just like PTSD. They can't prove you are faking it.
ReplyDeleteMost injured workers are labeled mentally ill and coincidentally their physical injuries or illnesses are not included when assessing their application benefits by the SSA. Why is that? Not to say that when applying for SSDI, it cannot cause a great amount of anxiety & depression when getting denials for over two years, but to be labeled something that is not true is criminal. Then being rushed off to the state's SSI by the ALJ's is yet more anxiety & depression knowing you can't get any resolve to correct the theft and mentally ill disorder. No wonder it is easy to label injured workers mentally ill. There is no one in the corrupt SSA system to correct any of it.
ReplyDeleteThere is no one, period, in the federal government , to correct any of it. AND this is what we pay taxes for decades? Incompetence, theft, and maligning of one's name, all to save the employer from paying out the correct amount of benefits. Sounds like the mentally ill are running this show.
It's called being a psychopath or a least a sociopath. Getting away with ruining a person's reputation, starving them out and then label them a nut in case they want to file a complaint against the monstrous malfeasance by employers WC insurers & the SSA. AND they call injured workers criminals???
In regards o the picture, just maybe the beneficiary is an injured worker who couldn't afford shoelaces on SSI benefits since it is so much less than SSDI benefits and with that not getting any worker comp benefits too for the total disability. God forbid we should be able to live like real citizens with a decent amount of benefits to survive.
At least the socks are clean. And white socks are in season.
ReplyDeleteHow long/frequent were the hospitalizations? If they happened two years apart, lasting 2 days and while off medication, it's probably not evidence of disability.
ReplyDeleteThe facts mentioned were "just released from the hospital" and many psych hospitalizations in a young person with schizophrenia, who they won't even trust to wear regular shoelaces. Even failure to follow prescribed treatment doesn't justify a denial with someone experiencing command hallucinations. No, whoever denied those cases is likely unfit to adjudicate without serious retraining. They are likely unnecessarily contributing dozens of claims each year to the hearing backlog, and will continue to do so until something is done about it.
ReplyDelete7:31AM,
ReplyDeleteYes, command hallucinations would likely affect work. They can also be faked, especially with lazy clinicians. Unless you've looked at the file, you're not equipped to pass judgment on the training and qualifications of the adjudicator.
And the failure to follow prescribed treatment is relevant if that treatment could control the hallucinations.
Make sure the record is complete and does support disability and then write a brief supporting same. It is the BURDEN of the claimant/representative to prove they are disabled, not the job of the Judge to dig through the records looking for supporting evidence.
ReplyDelete