Phoenix Rising supports the Millions Missing global day of protest
Phoenix Rising is delighted to support the demands being made in the ME/CFS community’s first-ever global day of protest …
Discuss the article on the Forums.

social security article in Washington Post

Discussion in 'Other Health News and Research' started by Jarod, Oct 21, 2014.

  1. Jarod

    Jarod Senior Member

    planet earth

    Article in Washington Post about social security backlog etc..I'm not in good enough shape to discuss at the moment. Trying to avoid the computer.
    barbc56 and xchocoholic like this.
  2. barbc56

    barbc56 Senior Member


    Very infomative article I have bookmarked this.

    There are so many problems with the Social Security disability process. While some snafus are predictable in any bureaucracy, this is beyond the pale.

    Several years ago, more judges were hired but the backlog persists. The fact that each judge has to personally read all of the medical reports without help from a clerk, slows the process even more.

    I really liked the idea of not having judges decide disability cases. Fortunately, I have private disability and while you still need to show you are disabled, a panel of medical experts makes the decision and the wait time is greatly reduced. In my case, less than one month after filing the papers and I got paid retroactively from the date I was officially unable to work.

    The monthly allotments quoted in the article seemed high compared to others I have known who get SSDI. Years ago when I was in social services, it was said 90% of cases are automatically turned down the first time. I need to do some research about the latter as I may have been misinformed.

    I could write a book here but the following says a lot.


    Thanks for posting this, especially at a time where you are feeling worse than usual.

  3. Valentijn

    Valentijn Senior Member

    They definitely need someone other than their own bureaucrats deciding cases ... it creates a problem such as is seen with ATOS in the UK, where employees are expected to perform in certain ways, and given implicit or explicit rejection quotas. The judges involved are on the bench for life, which gives them a great deal of control over themselves, whereas even outside experts might be worried about not having contracts renewed if they don't reject enough people.

    I think the major problem is with the earlier assessments. There should be very few people successfully appealing, because that first stage should primarily be weeding out people who are realistically able to work. Yet a lot of people are having to appeal repeatedly and getting approved by a judge, even when excluding the judges who say "yes" to almost everyone, or the times when judges were pressured to meet a quota which was only attainable if they didn't have to write up the reasons for rejection, and thus approved many cases without proper review.

    The first stage has turned into a knee-jerk "NO" reaction, which has made it a functionally useless, expensive, and time-consuming part of a bureaucratic process.
    barbc56 likes this.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page