Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not be so presumptuous as to believe that just because a person doesn't "look" disabled that there's nothing wrong with them. There are all kinds of disabilities which have no outward symptoms. For instance, a person suffering from the early stages of terminal cancer of some internal organ may look fine from the outside, but be eaten alive within and unable to work because he's tanked up on pain pills all day long.
And, don't assume that SS disability is easy to get, that those faking "lowlifes" can just fill out a form and the check starts coming almost immediately. It's not that simple. In fact, SS disability is very difficult to get and they do a good job of weeding out the fakes. You'd better damn well prove your case AND get it past their own doctors or you ain't gettin' crap. Most initial claims are rejected and the services of lawyers trained and experienced in navigating the system are often required. The wait time from initial filing to receiving benefits can often take YEARS.
Can the system be gamed? Sure it can, any system can, but it ain't easy.
ps: The amount of benefits paid is a factor of how much you've paid into the system. The more you've made during your working life, and the more SS taxes you've paid, the more your disability benefits will be.
Last edited by stillkit; 06-13-2012 at 04:35 AM..
Reason: ps:
I am fairly liberal on most issues, but I have seen enough people who are classified "disabled" and receive social security disability benefits for things such as ADD to know there is simply a lot of abuse.
I know very little about how one applies or receives Disability benefits, but I have seen young healthy people who receive this. It seems more prevalent in rural areas and seems to be a systemic cultural thing. Parents get it then children get it and then none of them work again.
I don't understand how anyone could be satisfied with making between $400 to $1200 a month for the rest of their life.
Don't get me wrong. I have no problem with those who are actually disabled, missing limbs, mental retardation etc., but I see fewer of these people and more of what I would classify as abuse.
For many "young people" aka teens the only way they can receive good care and therapy to cope with their condition is by having it classified as a disability. When that happens the resources available (which for many is worth far more than any monetary stipend) becomes significantly larger.
Not be so presumptuous as to believe that just because a person doesn't "look" disabled that there's nothing wrong with them. There are all kinds of disabilities which have no outward symptoms. For instance, a person suffering from the early stages of terminal cancer of some internal organ may look fine from the outside, but be eaten alive within and unable to work because he's tanked up on pain pills all day long.
And, don't assume that SS disability is easy to get, that those faking "lowlifes" can just fill out a form and the check starts coming almost immediately. It's not that simple. In fact, SS disability is very difficult to get and they do a good job of weeding out the fakes. You'd better damn well prove your case AND get it past their own doctors or you ain't gettin' crap. Most initial claims are rejected and the services of lawyers trained and experienced in navigating the system are often required. The wait time from initial filing to receiving benefits can often take YEARS.
Can the system be gamed? Sure it can, any system can, but it ain't easy.
ps: The amount of benefits paid is a factor of how much you've paid into the system. The more you've made during your working life, and the more SS taxes you've paid, the more your disability benefits will be.
Well the lawyers have an incentive to take these cases. They get paid a percentage of the final payment. The first payment is from the date they filed until they are actually accepted, which could be a good size check. There is no shortage of attorneys willing to take ss claims, which means that the chance of success is good; otherwise, they would not take the cases where their client could not pay them themselves.
For many "young people" aka teens the only way they can receive good care and therapy to cope with their condition is by having it classified as a disability. When that happens the resources available (which for many is worth far more than any monetary stipend) becomes significantly larger.
My oldest son falls into that category. He has an IQ of 65 with numerous neurological disorders.
Without SSI, he would never be able to get the medical care he needs or the required medications.
There are so many out there though who are just playing the system but Social Security just doesn't seem all that concerned about investigating them.
I don't think SSDI is easy to get. I've been declared disabled by 4 doctors and the VA. I've been waiting 3 years going on 4. If it's easy for someone to get it, I don't see how. Lawyers only take your case if the they think you have a case because they lose money if they don't have enough evidence. Also, with most cases, the lawyer has to do plenty of paper work sometimes for a few years. If it's anything like the cost of regular lawyers like family law, that lump sum the lawyers get at the end of your case is not very much unless you get approved right away. Most people don't get approved until 2-3 years later.
Well the lawyers have an incentive to take these cases. They get paid a percentage of the final payment. The first payment is from the date they filed until they are actually accepted, which could be a good size check. There is no shortage of attorneys willing to take ss claims, which means that the chance of success is good; otherwise, they would not take the cases where their client could not pay them themselves.
No, they do not. They can only get a percentage of any back pay owed the recipient or a set amount, whichever is smaller (I think it's $2500). Back pay is determined by when SS figures you became disabled, which may or may not have anything to do with the day you filed.
I see a lot of abuse. I will note that here in Texas we have three (3) total investigators who investigate those receiving disability yet are working or otherwise engaging in activity inconsistent with disabiltiy.
I recall one fun case: a claimant came into the hearing using crutches. Said he cannot walk without the crutches, and could not drive. When the hearing concluded the judge walked to his office, overlooking the parking lot. There was the claimant walking, with the crutches over his shoulder, which he then threw into the back of his pickup, and he got in and drove away. Application denied.
Several other notes from reading this thread:
Social Security disability payments total 115 billion per year.
A small portion of your Social Security taxes go towards your insured status for disability. Most people who file for and receive disability recoup what they had paid in within a years' time. Then, all taxpayer expense.
Attorneys: the usual fee agreement is 25 percent of the past due benefits, or $6,000.00, whichever is less. It is to the attorney's benefit, usually, to drag out the case. We had one firm that became so notorious for trying to delay the hearing that they were finally barred from being disability representatives.
My personal opinion based on 23 years of work (I write decisions for the administrative law judges): having a representative does not significantly increase the claimant's chances of being found disabled. It can help, of course, if the representative (it does not have to be an attorney) hustles about and gets statements from doctors. Yet many an unrepresented claimant is found disabled.
I will add that being found 'disabled' by the VA means nothing, since the standards for determining disability are different. Also, doctor's statements about disability, while entitled to probative weight, are not final statement by any means. You have lots of doctors who will readily give a statement that some claimant is disabled. Indeed, one reason is that their patient may have no insurance and no means to pay for the doctor's care, while if they get disability they will have either Medicare (Title II) or Medicaid (Title XVI), which means payments to the doctor for future care.
Note that you have Title II disability (for those who have insured status via paying social security taxes for a long enough period) and Title XVI supplemental security income benefits (welfare based; you must be found disabled and meet the income/resource limitations).
The administrative law judges like being referred to as "Federal judges", but they are not of the same class as real Federal judges. The Supreme Court justices and the judges of the US District Courts and Court of Appeals are 'Article III" judges (from the Constitution), while administrative law judges are Article II judges (of the executive branch). The ALJs used to be called 'hearing examiners' until they banded together and demanded the change to ALJ.
Years ago I was watching 60 Minutes, which had a piece about 'chronic fatigue syndrome'. The number of cases filed alleging chronic fatigue skyrocketed.
Next, fibromyalgia became the rage. Even a person who lost a leg due to diabetes would claim fibromyalgia.
Currently, Bipolar disorder is the disease of the moment. Probably is cited by a claimant in 60 percent of the cases.
Alcoholism used to be a basis for disability. Indeed, back in the 1980s people became outraged when it was discovered that many disability alcoholics had named their local bar as their 'representative payee' (i.e., the check was sent to the bartender each month, who then used the money to pay off the bar tab; sounds bizarre, but it is true). Congress in 1990 barred alcoholism and drug abuse as a basis for disability. I was part of the group that revisited thousands of such cases to see if they were disabled due to any other cause (such as liver disease).
No, they do not. They can only get a percentage of any back pay owed the recipient or a set amount, whichever is smaller (I think it's $2500). Back pay is determined by when SS figures you became disabled, which may or may not have anything to do with the day you filed.
Trust me. If lawyers did not have a financial incentive, you would not see lawyers in that area of the law. Take a look at your local yellow pages and see how many do ss law in your area.
I see a lot of abuse. I will note that here in Texas we have three (3) total investigators who investigate those receiving disability yet are working or otherwise engaging in activity inconsistent with disabiltiy.
I recall one fun case: a claimant came into the hearing using crutches. Said he cannot walk without the crutches, and could not drive. When the hearing concluded the judge walked to his office, overlooking the parking lot. There was the claimant walking, with the crutches over his shoulder, which he then threw into the back of his pickup, and he got in and drove away. Application denied.
Several other notes from reading this thread:
Social Security disability payments total 115 billion per year.
A small portion of your Social Security taxes go towards your insured status for disability. Most people who file for and receive disability recoup what they had paid in within a years' time. Then, all taxpayer expense.
Attorneys: the usual fee agreement is 25 percent of the past due benefits, or $6,000.00, whichever is less. It is to the attorney's benefit, usually, to drag out the case. We had one firm that became so notorious for trying to delay the hearing that they were finally barred from being disability representatives.
My personal opinion based on 23 years of work (I write decisions for the administrative law judges): having a representative does not significantly increase the claimant's chances of being found disabled. It can help, of course, if the representative (it does not have to be an attorney) hustles about and gets statements from doctors. Yet many an unrepresented claimant is found disabled.
I will add that being found 'disabled' by the VA means nothing, since the standards for determining disability are different. Also, doctor's statements about disability, while entitled to probative weight, are not final statement by any means. You have lots of doctors who will readily give a statement that some claimant is disabled. Indeed, one reason is that their patient may have no insurance and no means to pay for the doctor's care, while if they get disability they will have either Medicare (Title II) or Medicaid (Title XVI), which means payments to the doctor for future care.
Note that you have Title II disability (for those who have insured status via paying social security taxes for a long enough period) and Title XVI supplemental security income benefits (welfare based; you must be found disabled and meet the income/resource limitations).
The administrative law judges like being referred to as "Federal judges", but they are not of the same class as real Federal judges. The Supreme Court justices and the judges of the US District Courts and Court of Appeals are 'Article III" judges (from the Constitution), while administrative law judges are Article II judges (of the executive branch). The ALJs used to be called 'hearing examiners' until they banded together and demanded the change to ALJ.
Years ago I was watching 60 Minutes, which had a piece about 'chronic fatigue syndrome'. The number of cases filed alleging chronic fatigue skyrocketed.
Next, fibromyalgia became the rage. Even a person who lost a leg due to diabetes would claim fibromyalgia.
Currently, Bipolar disorder is the disease of the moment. Probably is cited by a claimant in 60 percent of the cases.
Alcoholism used to be a basis for disability. Indeed, back in the 1980s people became outraged when it was discovered that many disability alcoholics had named their local bar as their 'representative payee' (i.e., the check was sent to the bartender each month, who then used the money to pay off the bar tab; sounds bizarre, but it is true). Congress in 1990 barred alcoholism and drug abuse as a basis for disability. I was part of the group that revisited thousands of such cases to see if they were disabled due to any other cause (such as liver disease).
In the fiscal year that ended in September, the administrative law judge, who sits in the impoverished intersection of West Virginia, Kentucky and Ohio, decided 1,284 cases and awarded benefits in all but four. For the first six months of fiscal 2011, Mr. Daugherty approved payments in every one of his 729 decisions, according to the Social Security Administration.
The judge has maintained his near-perfect record despite years of complaints from other judges and staff members. They say he awards benefits too generously and takes cases from other judges without their permission. Staffers in the Huntington office say he hears a disproportionate number of cases filed by one area attorney. Mr. Daugherty has been known to hold hearings for as many as 20 of this lawyer's clients spaced 15 minutes apart.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
