Massachusetts Social Security Disability Lawyers Blog

A news article in the Wall Street Journal discusses how difficult it can be to get approved for Social Security Disability benefits (SSDI). As noted in the article, the injury or illness for which a claimant is seeking SSDI benefits must be so severe that it leaves the claimant unable to work in any job, not just the job in which the worker is currently employed. The disability must also be expected to last more than one year, or result in death, to be considered serious enough to qualify for benefits from the Social Security Administration (SSA).

In addition to the disability requirements, a claimant must also have worked and paid taxes for a considerable number of years (this is dependent on the age of the claimant) prior to submitting an application for benefits. The money a worker pays in taxes goes towards this eligibility requirement, which is termed paying into the system.

Our disability attorneys note the main point of the article was to illustrate concerns that people who aren’t really disabled are freeloading off the system are simply wrong. While there are obviously some instances of SSDI fraud, the vast majority of benefit recipients are not only genuinely disabled, but also fought a very hard uphill battle to get approved for benefits in the first place.

These misconceptions are unfortunately becoming more prevalent, as concerns rise that the SSA will run out of money for the SSDI program in the next two years unless a budget is approved.

The reason it is so difficult to obtain approval for benefits is that the SSA apparently decided long ago that the best way to run the program is to routinely deny nearly every claimant who submits an application for benefits.
Continue reading

Browning v. Colvin, an appeal heard before the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, involved a woman who had applied for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits. The United States Social Security Administration (SSA) oversees the SSI program. As our SSI attorneys in Boston can explain, SSI benefits are available to low-income individuals who are elderly, blind, or permanently disabled regardless of work history.

Claimant’s application for SSI benefits was denied by the administrative law judge (ALJ) employed by the SSA. Claimant appealed the denial.

In Browning, claimant was 25 years of age and filed for SSI benefits due to the fact that she was intellectually disabled and suffered from knee and hip problems. Her joint disease was a result of a childhood illness known as Legg-Calve-Perthes Disease.
Continue reading

Welsh v. Colvin, an appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, involves a claimant who applied for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits from the United States Social Security Administration (SSA). The SSA denied his applications for benefits.

After the SSA denied his initial application, he appealed that decision. As an experienced SSDI attorney in Massachusetts can explain, the SSA routinely denies far more than half of all new applications almost as a matter of course. Once receiving an initial denial, claimants can appeal the decision to the SSA in writing.

Once the SSA agent gets a written appeal, the denial is reviewed on a peer review system. This means that a coworker of the employee who made the initial denial will review the application and decide if a mistake was made. It is almost always the case that the coworker handling the first appeal will defer to his or her coworker who denied the application and affirm the earlier determination.
Continue reading

In Whitman v. Colvin, an appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, claimant filed an application for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits under Title II of the United States Social Security Act. Our SSDI lawyers in Boston understand that obtaining a rating of total disability may require extensive litigation on behalf of a claimant.

Claimant asserted that he became disabled in 2007 as result of a degenerative disease affecting his spinal column and a degenerative disease in the joint of one of his thumbs. Claimant initially reported his condition while in prison. On a prison health evaluation form, he stated that he had lower back pain as a result of falling multiple times, and he was currently taking acetaminophen, which was not helping much to control the pain.

The medical staff listed claimant as having chronic back pain and prescribed ibuprofen to help with the plain, but otherwise indicated that he was a healthy adult male with no work restrictions. When he was released from prison, the exit medical evaluation did not mention back pain, but he was given a prescription for extra strength ibuprofen.

Two years later, when claimant applied for SSDI benefits, he was ordered to undergo a medical evaluation in which x-rays of his back were taken. The evaluating physician noted that he had a severe degenerative disc disease but did not find any presence of misalignment in his spine.

When answering questions for the patient history report, claimant noted that he had unbearable back pain and could not sleep at night. Claimant again blamed his falls during work as the cause of this back pain. The doctor wrote an opinion that stated that claimant had generalized osteoarthritis in his back, right wrist, and thumb. The doctor was of the opinion that claimant was disabled and could not work in his present condition.
Continue reading

Moon v. Calvin, a case from the U.S. District Court for the Seventh Circuit, involved a claimant who was 26-years-old at the time she filed for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits. She is a mother who has worked in the past as a cashier, bank employee, and as a nursing assistant.

As your Boston disability lawyer understands, being disabled can mean different things to different people. This claimant had a long history of health problems, including joint problems, back pain, sleep apnea, and migraines, and she also suffers from depression. According to doctors, most of her health conditions are a result of the fact that she is 5’5″ tall and weighs over 400 pounds.

When claimant was diagnosed with migraines, she was prescribed two drugs but chose not to take them due to worries of side effects. She was eventually prescribed two new drugs, which were being taken at the time of her hearing before an administrative law judge (ALJ). The ALJ is employed by the Social Security Administration (SSA), which, among its other responsibilities, oversees the SSDI program.
Continue reading