Disabled Adult Child Benefits

Most people are unaware that there are special situations where a "child" over the age of 21, who is disabled, can apply for Social Security Disability ("SSD") benefits under one of their parents' social security record ("SSR").  One of the parents must be receiving SSD benefits, Social Security Retirement benefits, or have passed away.   Thus, a person over 22 years of age, who did not have enough work history to apply on their own SSR, can apply on a parent's SSR.

We represent a 22 year old client from Bethpage, New York with mental impairments, who lacked sufficient work credits to apply on his own SSR for SSD benefits.  He would have had to apply for Supplemental Security Income ("SSI"), and his monthly benefit would have been much lower.  Moreover, since he lived with his mother he may not have even qualified for SSI benefits.

When he first contacted us, we asked him if either of his parents received SSD benefits.  Because he advised us that his mother was receiving SSD benefits, we were able to apply for his SSD benefits under his mother's SSR.

We received a fully favorable decision from ALJ Tirrell, after supplying medical records that he requested in addition to the medical evidence we had already submitted.

This is another example of why you should retain an experienced disability attorney if you plan on applying for SSD.  Our office, located in Melville, Long Island, offers a free phone consultation.

Multiple Sclerosis

Multiple Sclerosis (“MS”) is a disabling disease because of its symptoms.  Merely having objective evidence for the diagnosis is insufficient to secure disability benefits.

We represent a 32 year old with MS from Bethpage who worked as a teacher.  The MS diagnosis was never challenged, but the State agency denied Social Security Disability (“SSD”) benefits.  We obtained reports from the claimant’s neurologist, internist, pain management specialist, and chiropractor explaining why the claimant’s symptoms interfered with her ability to work consistently.  Based on those reports, the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) agreed that the claimant would be off task at least 21% of the time.  Then, based on the testimony of the vocational expert, the ALJ determined the claimant was disabled.

You cannot assume that you will get approved for disability based on a medical diagnosis.  It’s important to know what information, beyond a diagnosis and medical records, would be needed to have your claim approved.  This is why we always recommend hiring an experienced disability attorney to represent you for your SSD claim.  Our office, located on Long Island, offers a free phone consultation.  Please call us if you want to apply for disability and we will discuss your options with you.

Headaches

Disability adjudicators are skeptical about approving claims for headaches because the pain cannot be seen, and there is no diagnostic test for them.  However, if a cause for the headaches can be objectively established, then the benefits should be approved.

We represent a 55 year old administrative clerk from Wantagh with pseudotumor cerebri.  Pseudotumor cerebri is a somewhat rare condition that causes increased pressure inside the skull.  As the pressure increases, so do a person’s headaches.  In preparation for a hearing with an administrative law judge (“ALJ”), we submitted medical treatise information identifying the symptoms of pseudotumor cerebri, and detailed reports from the treating neurologist, which explained the genesis and severity of the resulting headaches.

The ALJ issued a fully favorable decision, awarding the claimant Social Security Disability ("SSD") benefits.   Our client is overjoyed, and thankful that she retained us.  We highly recommend retaining an experienced disability attorney if you are applying for SSD benefits.  Call our office for a free phone consultations.  We are conveniently located on Long Island in Melville.

Transferable Skills

The number of on-the-record (“OTR”) approvals has decreased over the years, due in large part to the elimination of the treating physician rule allowance rate has correspondingly decreased.  Nonetheless, when the vocational facts align with the medical evidence, an OTR should be sought.

We represent a 58 year old from Port Jefferson Station with sleep apnea, cardiovascular and orthopedic impairments that stopped him from working in law enforcement.  During a hearing with an ALJ from Connecticut, a vocational witness (“VW”) testified that the claimant’s past work was light and had no transferable skills.

The claimant’s pulmonologists confirmed that Mr. Kline met the criteria of listing 3.02 A and B, based on an FVC of 1.68 and an FEV of 1.12.  The claimant’s pulmonary function testing revealed “severe restriction/obstruction.”

After the case was transferred back to the Long Island hearing office, the physicians treating the claimant’s musculoskeletal impairments and obstructive sleep apnea concluded the claimant could not even perform sedentary work.  Moreover, the VW had testified that leg elevation would preclude all work, and the claimant’s orthopedist stressed the importance for the claimant to elevate his legs.

In light of the above, we submitted a request for an OTR.  Even if the claimant did not meet a listing, his less than sedentary work capacity would require finding him disabled.  Furthermore, even if the claimant did not meet a listing, and did not have a less than sedentary work capacity, his need to elevate his legs would require finding him disabled.  Additionally, even if the claimant did not meet a listing, and did not have a less than sedentary work capacity, and did not need to elevate his legs, and had light work capacity, then the medical-vocational rules would require finding him disabled.  The ALJ approved canceled the hearing, and approved the OTR.

 

OTR Approved

The number of on-the-record (“OTR”) approvals has decreased over the years, due in large part to the elimination of the treating physician rule allowance rate has correspondingly decreased.  Nonetheless, when the vocational facts align with the medical evidence, an OTR should be sought.

We represent a 58 year old from Port Jefferson Station with sleep apnea, cardiovascular and orthopedic impairments that stopped him from working in law enforcement.  During a hearing with an ALJ from Connecticut, a vocational witness (“VW”) testified that the claimant’s past work was light and had no transferable skills.

The claimant’s pulmonologists confirmed that the claimant met the criteria of listing 3.02 A and B, based on an FVC of 1.68 and an FEV of 1.12.  The claimant’s pulmonary function testing revealed “severe restriction/obstruction.”

After the case was transferred back to the Long Island hearing office, the physicians treating the claimant’s musculoskeletal impairments and obstructive sleep apnea concluded the claimant could not even perform sedentary work.  Moreover, the VW had testified that leg elevation would preclude all work, and the claimant’s orthopedist stressed the importance for the claimant to elevate his legs.

In light of the above, we submitted a request for an OTR.  Even if the claimant did not meet a listing, his less than sedentary work capacity would require finding him disabled.  Furthermore, even if the claimant did not meet a listing, and did not have a less than sedentary work capacity, his need to elevate his legs would require finding him disabled.  Additionally, even if the claimant did not meet a listing, and did not have a less than sedentary work capacity, and did not need to elevate his legs, and had light work capacity, then the medical-vocational rules would require finding him disabled.  The ALJ approved canceled the hearing, and approved the OTR.

 

LTD Approvals

We obtained reversals of a long term disability (“LTD”) denial and a termination this week from Hartford and Lincoln.  What they had in common was submitting overwhelming objective and subjective medical and vocational evidence.  We advised each client in advance that the reports, records, tests, and letters we needed might seem like gilding the lily to them, but our track record for successfully securing LTD benefits speaks for itself.

Consultative Exams ("CEs") and the State agency ("DDS")

I get more questions about CEs than any other topic.  DDS schedules CEs before they even request records from the claimant's treating doctors, who according to Social Security's own rules are the "preferred source" for medical information.

I represent a 48 year old Medical Assistant from Bay Shore whose impairments cause suffering from debilitating pain.  The DDS representative handling the case told my office that this was a very strong case, with an overabundance of medical evidence.  Nonetheless, the representative still denied Social Security Disability ("SSD") benefits solely because the claimant did not attend a CE.

My client was approved today at her hearing.  The ALJ acknowledged all of the supporting objecting evidence I obtained from the claimant's treating doctors, which included MRI's, scans and other objective test results.  The ALJ found the claimant's testimony to be credible, consistent with the treatment provided, and the treating doctors' opinions to be persuasive.  The fact that the claimant did not attend a CE was not even mentioned.

DDS continues to practice the boondoggle policy of scheduling needless CEs for claimants.  The CE gives DDS the excuse to ignore the large amounts of medical information in the file, and deny the claim based on the vague CE opinions, which the federal courts uniformly deride.  CEs delay benefits as they force claimants to defend themselves against the typically fraudulent exams those doctors perform.

My client is extremely happy that she retained an experienced disability attorney who was able to obtain a favorable outcome for her, rather than trying to take on Social Security by herself. Please call my office for a free phone consultation if you are thinking about applying for SSD benefits.  My office is conveniently located in Melville, Long Island.