[Terabithia]

My husband (his paralegal) has asked for reconsideration for SSD. He has new information, and I'm wondering if it might change the outcome at all.

He got an MRI on his back, which he hadn't had in many years. It showed sciatica and spondylothesis, which he already knew he had - he was diagnosed with spondylolithesis as a child - but this MRI shows it's current severity. Also, he now has a long detailed form for his psychiatrist to fill out during his next visit - another thing they didn't have before.

He had to quit truck driving last year because of dissociation. Between this and his back it should be obvious that he can't drive a truck anymore. Before his career as a truck driver, he sold carpet for 10 years, and his psychiatrist knows that he could not do that job any more because of social anxiety. He's also 53 years old. All of these things really work in his favor as far as getting approved.

Could we get someone that does disability evaluations to examine him for his back pain, and then make an appointment ourselves with social security, and bring in the MRI results, the evaluation, and the psychiatric form - would they rethink things, or is that naive thinking?

[BeyondtheRainbow]

You definitely should make sure social security gets the new MRI results ad the psych eval (if that didn't come from them). Everything new is good.

Evaluation by any doctor also can help but it would just be submitted to social security; you can't make an appointment with the decision makers. All you can do is make sure every scrap of relevant paper gets to their office.

They may send him for a disability eval (or 2 since he is claiming physical and psychiatric issues). That's at their discretion and cost.

The reconsideration period is unfortunately not the time most likely to get approval. About 30% of people are approved initially and a smaller number in reconsideration. Then a lot more are approved with the judicial review which can take a long time depending on your state. It doesn't really seem there is a good way to look at a case from the outside (a disability attorney might be able to) and know what approval will take. However, that you have an attorney means the attorney thought there was a good chance of approval or he wouldn't have taken the case.

[Terabithia]

Thank you. Your message was reassuring to me that we are doing the right thing right now. We will hold on to the lawyer that took his case, and make sure that every record gets to them. Thanks again. That was very helpful.

[Rose76]

There is a very specific process for pursuing an appeal, and I don't believe that comes down to you just making an appointment "with Social Security." This is why I think it's a really good idea to be represented by a law firm. You mention a "paralegal," so maybe you have been involved with legal representation. Having the new medical evidence that you describe is just the sort of basis on which attorneys construct their argument that a decision against granting SSDI should be reviewed and overturned. There are deadines for submitting a request for an appeal. There is specific paperwork to fill out and submit. Attorneys know precisely how to comply with these requirements and how to collect the best evidence that needs to be presented and how to present it. For the sake of $6000, or so, I would team up with a law firm that specializes in disability claims. They can even possibly get benefits granted retroactively. Fumbling around with a process that they don't thoroughly understand, claimants have been known to damage their own case. Your husband has a lot of money at stake here. I would invest that six grand. Doing so might pay for itself, in the long run.

What you think "should be obvious" may not clinch the argument in your favor. The question isn't just over whether or not your husband can drive a truck. It's a question of whether or not he can do any work that allows him to be "gainfully employed," such as something he's never done before that he could be trained for. The way that argument can be made, or successfully refuted, involves thinking skills that go way beyond what is "obvious" to non-lawyers. The SSA doesn't really care about the diagnosis, per se. They care about "how does that diagnosis interfere with a person holding a job." Larry Flint (of Hustler magazine) earned loads of money even after becoming paralyzed from the waist down. People tend to think that they can present some compelling evidence, like the MRI you describe, and that the SSA will put two and two together and come to a reasonable conclusion. But the SSA isn't going to put nothin together. Not even some real obvious stuff. Making the linkages in a cogent presentation is the job of the claimant. Non-attorneys lack the training to know how to do that.

I don't think you're naive in believing your husband has a good case, much improved by new evidence. I suspect he has an excellent case if it's properly presented. I believe you may be naive in thinking that you and he can do that on your own. You may even be very smart people, but you lack experience navigating the system. The unfortunate reality is that who does or doesn't get approved for SSDI is not based on who most deserves to be approved. I got approved and, TBH, I've seen people more deserving that me get denied. I had a law firm helping me, and I spent a lot of time reading books and watching video presentations put together by lawyers. Go to YouTube and search "applying for SSDI."

[Terabithia]

Thank you for all the advice. We got a lawyer, and even though his paralegal is crazy busy, we're not going it alone. Everything you said is validation for me that this decision we finally came to tonight is the wisest. I really appreciate your response.

[BeyondtheRainbow]

Something I think helped me get approved was that when they asked me about medical history I gave them EVERYTHING. However long I was allowed to go back I did and I listed every single doctor, even ones who I had seen only once. I just let SS get the records themselves but since you have legal representation you can push hard to have them cover everything. If they don't care about something it doesn't hurt them to have it. I have asthma that is difficult to treat because of allergies to meds and most asthma meds destabilize my bipolar. I had tons of documentation about that and they didn't even mention it, just went with the psych. stuff. But it certainly doesn't hurt them to have that stuff on file since I can't work with cleaners, anywhere with mold or near pollution. It's not my main problem or my reason for disability but my records show it exists.

[Rose76]

I fully agree with Rainbow, above. I threw in everything but the kitchen sink. And I could relate every problem, physical and mental, to being an impediment to employment. Apparently, The SSA cared about my diverse ailments, as they sent me to a posychiatrist, a regular doctor and for xrays of my achey spots. Those xrays found things wrong with me that I didn't even know I had . . . like scoliosis.

I don't know to what extent each ailment contributed to me getting approved because they never told me why they approved me. But books I read said a number if things added together can iften be more compelling than just focusing on what you think us your main problem.

[Terabithia]

That's what we were thinking, too. He has many different problems, even though those others, by themselves do not make him disabled.

[Rose76]

Sounds like your lawyer is trying to squeeze maximum productivity out of a paralegal. "Crazy busy" sounds to me like "stretched too thin." But you've already established the relationship, so probably too late to change.

This is why I encourage applicants to do what I did and hook up with one of those big firms that only does disability. They operate like a factory. No one paralegal has to do everything. One office full of clerks just gathers medical records. Another office puts together the response describing your daily existance. That's actually a good thing for you to do yourself, after reading up on what the SSA needs to hear: concrete detail. You don't just say, "I dissociate." You say, "On March 15, 2016, I tried to enter the Interstate using an exit ramp and found myself facing oncoming traffic. I became very confused as horns were honking at me, and I almost collided with a tour bus." This is where "anecdotal evidence" is most compelling. Only the worker, himself, can know and give these kind of concrete examples of how he could not cope.

You need to paint a portrait of "failure," which people often don't like to do. People want to say, "I was a good employee." Well, then, keep being an employee!" will be the response of the SSA.

[jaynedough]

Like Rose76 and BeyondTheRainbow said, documentation is key. Write down the symptoms, their duration, how often they happen, what he does to alleviate symptoms, what makes them worse. Keep a record of appointments, as well as any calls to healthcare providers and tests. Keep the documentation together. Use your phone to jot down stuff so you don't forget. It sounds like a pain in the posterior, but once you get the initial organization started, it'll get easier. I hope this made sense. I'm still dealing with a sleep deficit.