Social Security and You: More disability benefits controversy

Two weeks ago, I wrote a column discussing the Social Security disability program. I wrote about how the program is constantly criticized and subject to annual tinkering by Congress and other oversight agencies, primarily because of the program’s subjective nature. Meaning, people have different opinions on what constitutes a disability for Social Security benefit purposes.

I could have predicted readers’ rather passionate responses to that column, and how they perfectly illustrate that subjectivity.

About half the people who emailed me feel that the program rules are way too tough. One respondent lamented that “you almost have to have one foot in the grave” to qualify for disability benefits. The other half of respondents wrote diatribes about the rules being way too lenient. One writer said, “Disability benefits are handed out like candy to totally undeserving people.”

Obviously, these diametrically opposing views can’t both be right. In fact, neither one of them is right. It is an insult to millions of truly disabled people who receive monthly disability checks to accuse them of being undeserving and dipping into the government candy jar.

It is also an insult to thousands of dedicated public servants charged with the thankless task of deciding who is and who isn’t legally disabled.

So, I thought that sharing and commenting on a couple of these responses can shed even more light on this controversial subject. I changed the names of the following responders to preserve their anonymity.

Myth about first claims

Fran wrote: “I have severe fibromyalgia. I first applied for disability two years ago and was turned down as part of the process I read about online that said every disability claim is rejected the first time around. I filed an appeal and was turned down again. So I hired a lawyer, and 18 months later he helped me win my case. I got back pay benefits, but had to give half of it to my lawyer. I was extremely disappointed with the entire process.”

It is a common myth that the Social Security Administration automatically denies all first claims for disability benefits. In truth, about 35 percent of all claims are approved, and about 15 percent of first appeals are found in favor of the disability applicant. In my view, the fact that Fran was rejected twice is a pretty good indication that her claim was a borderline situation.

For readers unfamiliar with fibromyalgia, it is a disorder characterized by widespread muscular pain. The thing is, pain is a difficult symptom to measure and document. Excruciating pain to one person could merely be discomfort to someone else. And consider this: how much pain should a person experience to be considered disabled and unable to work? Obviously, the first two SSA decision-makers thought Fran was still able to work despite her condition. But the third judge who decided the appeal disagreed. Maybe Fran’s fibromyalgia worsened over the two years since she filed her first claim. Or maybe it really was a borderline case and the third reviewer was the charm.

Does Fran’s case prove that the system is terribly flawed? Or does it simply demonstrate that the disability decision-making process is very subjective and prone to various interpretations?

Back to homepage

Subscriber Login

Keep reading with a digital access subscription.

Subscribe now

I’m not the fraud police

I got another email from Hank. He echoed the sentiments of many others when he wrote: “Social Security disability is the biggest rip-off boondoggle of all federal programs. It should be the poster child for government giveaways. I personally know of four people getting benefits who don’t deserve them. My brother-in-law is a classic example. He should be working. But instead, he sits on his fat butt all day long collecting a $2,000 Supplemental Security Income welfare check every month.”

Let me dissect Hank’s allegations. First of all, there’s no way his brother-in-law — we’ll call him Ed — is getting a $2,000 SSI check every month. Millions of people confuse the Supplemental Security Income disability program with the Social Security disability program.

An SSI check is definitely welfare; but the maximum SSI monthly check is around $750. Ed must be receiving a Social Security disability check. That’s not welfare. Ed would have had to work and pay Social Security taxes for a substantial period of time to qualify for those monthly benefits.

Second, does Hank really know that Ed is a deadbeat malingerer ripping off the government? Maybe there’s a bit of jealousy or family resentment involved?

Finally, Hank’s claim to know four undeserving people getting benefits is certainly suspect. I’m not sure what circles Hank hangs out in, but I’d be hard-pressed to name four people I know who are getting Social Security disability, let alone four folks who are getting benefits and don’t deserve them.

But Hank is certainly not alone. I hear from people all the time who believe that their relatives, neighbors, friends, former co-workers, etc. are getting benefits they’re not due or don’t deserve.

I’m not sure what causes this phenomenon. My guess is, it’s the public’s growing mistrust in big government. They figure the government can’t do anything right, so they just assume the government’s largest disability program is fraught with fraud and incompetence. In my view, whatever benefits they are getting from that big bad bungling government are richly deserved.

I’m always telling the Hanks of the world to stop griping to me. I can’t do anything about it. But if they truly believe that someone they know is undeserving of disability benefits, turn them in to SSA fraud department. It’s a simple process that can be done anonymously: Go to the SSA website and click on the anti-fraud page, which explains how the agency takes fraud very seriously and allows you to make a report.

My message to Hank and all the other complainers out there: Put your computer mouse where your mouth is and do something about it!