After 40 years in the workforce, James Blume began collecting well-earned Social Security retirement benefits, including an additional amount for his son who was still in school.
When the homeschool teen turned 18 last year, however, the additional benefit stopped—even though the law says he still qualified for the payment.
“We filled out their form stating that he was still in secondary school,” James Blume recalled, “but this was not sufficient. The Social Security Administration needed more to substantiate [his status] and said they wanted the school to give a statement that he had met their requirements for education.” ...
Sadly, situations like the one experienced by the Blumes are no longer a rarity.
According to Senior Counsel Darren Jones, who deals with Social Security Administration (SSA) issues along with other members of Home School Legal Defense Association’s litigation team, the number of cases we’re dealing with in this area has nearly tripled in the past five years.
The problem typically occurs after a homeschool student turns 18. That’s when the additional benefit granted on behalf of a child usually ends for parents receiving SSA payments for retirement, disability, or the death of a spouse.
The law says that youth who are still going to school full-time qualify for Social Security students benefits until two months after their 19th birthday. And it’s fairly straightforward for students in traditional schools to show they are still eligible for these payments. ...
Sometimes problems with Social Security stem not from the complications of individual cases but because of regional policies.
This explains why several midwestern states, including Michigan and Minnesota, have proven especially troubling.
I saw a case like this maybe 20 years ago. I thought the agency had given up on harassing the home schoolers. I’m especially surprised to read that this may be a regional issue.
Read Jones said that Social Security officials in these jurisdictions have developed local guidelines that discriminate against homeschool students based on a faulty understanding of compulsory education laws. Their view is that, because there is nothing compelling 18-year-olds to remain in school, these teens can’t legally be considered students....
4 comments:
I think it is more unfamiliarity with homeschooling than a bias against home schoolers. Traditional schools--easy to get the proper forms filled out. Home schools--"Hey, this is your parent's signature on these forms. This doesn't look legit."
Mr. Read is simply puffing up the issue. "Discrimination", yeah right. More like managerial apathy towards the issue, as in "who cares".
The problem is far more basic than discrimination.
The truth of the matter is that the agency doesn't provide more than minimal basic policy on home schooling that basically boils down to "check the precedent decisions for your state. If they are out of date, get a new one". Of course, they are all woefully out of date (some by a decade or more) while at the same time the states have been liberalizing their home school laws.
The agency then expects local offices (who don't even have enough employees to answer their phones) to obtain updated home school precedence decisions as needed every 4-5 years from their regional Office of General Counsel. The same problem actually applies to GED classes and online/Internet schooling as well.
I'd hazard a guess that 8 out of 10 claims specialists (and even a lot of TEs, even) don't even know how to request a precedent decision from OGC. The policy instructions in POMS on how to do it are completely out of date and vague as crap, so even the ones who look it up won't easily figure it out. And, even the ones who do will then have to deal with getting OGC to issue them in less than a year. In short, it is a crapshoot at best.
What the agency should do is actually make OGC on a state-by-state basis evaluate all home schooling laws every 5 years and issue policy based upon that evaluation.
In short, it will never happen because it would interfere with the golf game of somebody with a puffed up sense of self importance.
Best to tell everybody who is denied as a student due to home school to just appeal it directly to the servicing program service center.
FYI,
This is not a nationwide issue. It involves almost all home schooled adults in Michigan (GLPSC). MAMPSC can comment on Minnesota cases. Please see the following opinion for why this is happening:
https://secure.ssa.gov/apps10/poms.nsf/lnx/1508005025
Essentially, SSA regulation requires the State to actually "authorize" home schooling. The State of Michigan changed the law to not recognize it after the student attains age 18; Michigan does not recognize or regulate home schools with students who are age eighteen or older. Based on the change in Michigan laws, SSA counsel now sees that State of Michigan as not authorizing home schooling past age 18. It reads authorization is required based on 20 CFR 404.367.
This remains true even if the student is engaged in program with an educational institution in another State that has already recognized it. This is due to SSA policy requiring "[t]he home school the student attends meets the requirements of the State law where he or she resides" as the State of Michigan does not authorize home schooling for adults age 18 or older.
Basically, SSA now interprets the laws of Michigan to not actually permit home schooling students age 18 or older and therefore are ineligible for student benefits. /shurg, seems like a problem with Michigan and not SSA.
FYI, Benefit Authorizers, Claims Specialists, Claims Technical Experts and Analyst in GLPSC were confused as to why this opinion was pushed with little guidance on controls. No major announcement was issued. No listing established to follow on this. The word was put into an e-mail that "the opinion is clear and there is no need for further guidance".
And this would be a big deal in Michigan as many parents would allege the religious exemption card to continue benefits, even though there was no evidence of the child ever being home schooled. The defense league would just send a letter stating Michigan does not require a parent to do certain things for religious education.
Unfortunately for some, just another scam to get benefits...almost impossible to separate the true home schooler from the grifters. Hard to blame the Agency with the lack of clear cut law and documentation. The Benefits for Everyone lobby does not look at the real world.
Post a Comment