If my post came across to Sabby in the way that it did to you, then I am very sorry. If that is the case, then I have totally mis-communicated what I intended to impart.

What I wished to convey was based on my own recent experience filling out a ton of forms and answering a bunch of questions at a orthopedic eval. that I believe the SSA has designed, in part, to make the claimant feel very intimidated. (Lots of disability attorneys have the same view.)

When first reading these questions, the answers that would have first popped out of my naiive mouth would have been detrimental to the success of my claim. I listened to audio presentations by attorneys on-line, and they cautioned against just naiively putting down the first thing that pops into your head. I went to Barnes and Noble and bought a book on how to navigate the process, and I did more on-line research. It convinced me that you have to think of the outcome that you are aiming for and tailor your responses to promote that outcome. This is called learning to think a little bit like a lawyer. And it's a good thing to do. Sometimes, I would call the law firm and ask, "How should I respond to such-and-such?" The clerk would say, "We can't really tell you what to say." I had to get my advice from research that I did for myself. I had to learn to ask myself the question, "How is the SSA going to use the feedback I give them? Am I giving them something they can use as ammunition against me?" My research into good sources told me that the SSA will do that in a heartbeat. So you have to be clear in your mind about how your condition interferes with getting through the challenges of the workday and you have to make your answers support that contention. If Sabby wants to have success with her claim, it doesn't matter what I think. It matters what the SSA thinks. And they will expect the feedback that she gives to correlate with the claim she has submitted. That is almost impossible to do, in my opinion, unless someone tips you off that you have to be very careful about what you say. Also, you don't have to volunteer everything that might pop into your head. It's like being on a witness stand where you are the defendant being examined by the prosecuting attorney.

So my point was just be careful and craft your answers to support what you believe you have a right to assert - that you need to retire based on disability. It would be nice if the SSA would let us give feedback explaining how being in the workplace undermines our health, in whatever way it does so. That's not how the questions sounded to me. Well, let me backtrack and say you can sort of put that in there, if you're good with language. But that takes some clever thinking. I wasn't that clever. My research wised me up. The way you get interrogated - in writing and orally by the evaluating physician - almost forces you to state that you are capable of doing all kinds of productive things. It really is a trap. That's why people end up getting lawyers.

Sabby honestly believes that she has limitations interfering with her remaining employed. I would never think that anyone here at PC, especially a mature person, as Sabby is, comes to that conclusion on some willie-nillie basis. I support her in her endeavor to get SSDI. I sought to share what I gleaned from my research to possibly be helpful.

By the way, when you impose your own boldface on what you claim is a transposed quote, you are changing the tone of another person's words, which can impose a meaning that you have extracted, which may not have been there.

It is good, however, for me to get feedback on the meaning that others construe when they read my post. It helps me to consider how I might better write, so as not to mis-communicate.

I forget, Perna, have you ever been through the process of applying for disability? You're very informed and knowledgeable about resources. But do you realize how the worthiness of the person's claim can have less to do with getting approved, than the "smarts" with which that claim is substantiated? I'm not talking about intelligence. I'm talking about being savvy to the system. Again, that's what keeps lawyers in business.