If you have become disabled and you believe you may qualify for Social Security disability insurance (SSDI) benefits, you may think it would be a good idea to visit their office and obtain some help and advice on filing out the application.

You may have heard or read that the SSDI application is somewhat long and involved, and that it would be helpful to sit down with a live person, so you can ask questions and seek clarification when you are unsure about a topic.

According to one woman, that may not work out so well. She relates her experience of visiting a local Social Security Administration office and what she thought of their customer service. Turns out, not a great deal. She explains that the SSA violated “at least four cardinal rules of customer service.”

She found the local SSA office “depressing.” Her experience deteriorated after she entered the building, noting that the “metal chairs” were not designed to be sat in for 30 minutes, let alone the multiple hour waits that seem standard.

Customer service should put the customer first in an attractive setting. Does this fail to occur at SSA offices because no one in the office one cares? Probably not, remember, the employees of the SSA have to be there 40 hours or more a week.

The offices and the customer service offered often are lacking because the system has seen substantial growth, without a commensurate increase in funding for facilities and staff.

This means it is more important than ever when you apply for SSDI benefits to see to it that your application is complete and is not missing any important medical records or other documentation.

The process can already be uncomfortably slow, so the fewer mistakes and missing documents, the more likely your application is to receive faster treatment.

Source: The Huffington Post, “Social Security Administration’s Cautionary Tale of Customer Service,” Liz Wainger, February 5, 2014

After the collapse of the financial markets caused by the reckless use of mortgage-backed securities and the concomitant collapse of the real estate markets, workers every where were severely affected. From the loss of value in their homes to the loss of their jobs, the great recession left many workers in desperate financial positions.

Many, after a job loss, were forced to use unemployment insurance as they looked for new jobs. Against this backdrop, the Social Security Administration saw increases in applications for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits. This increase has been ongoing over the last few decades, but some critics of the SSDI program used these two occurrences as an excuse to attack SSDI.

They claimed the program is full of fraud, and that millions of unemployed workers were flooding the program with applications for SSDI benefits after their unemployment insurance had run out.

A study by a team of university researchers from Columbia and Berkeley has found that there is no significant statistical connection between worker’s expiration of the unemployment benefits and the increase in SSDI applications.

The lead author of the study said, “[T]here is no convincing evidence that workers whose unemployment benefits have expired apply for disability insurance on a large scale.”

We have always thought it highly unlikely that workers who had exhausted their unemployment insurance could successfully apply for SSDI benefits, since a great majority of them would not have the necessary medical impairment that would allow them to qualify for SSDI.

The study found that less than 2 percent of workers who had exhausted their unemployment insurance even applied for SSDI.

Source: Sacramento Bee, “Study Reveals New Insight About Social Security Disability Benefits Amid Agency’s Influx Of Problems,” PRNewswire, February 10, 2014

The Social Security Administration (SSA) and its disability program have been under attack on many fronts in the last few years. The program is underfunded. Congress has expanded the qualifying medical conditions and broadened the eligibility for the program, but failed to provide the extra sources of funding for the program.

As a result, the trust fund that supports Social Security disability insurance (SSDI) is practically exhausted and benefits could be cut if Congress fails to act. The program has also been accused of being too generous with its interpretations of what qualifies for disability benefits.

In reaction to some of these problems, the SSA is updating various aspect of how SSDI is administered. One important change for many applicants is revision being made to the “dictionary” of job listings.

To speed processing of applications for benefits, the SSA uses a reference document that identifies potential jobs and their qualifications.

Because the disability determination requires that the SSA look to see if your training or education would allow you to find other employment, it is important for the job listings to accurately reflect the job market as it exists today.

The listing has not been updated for 23 years, and includes jobs like “blacksmith” but does not cover many new tech related jobs that exist. This may mean that some people who would qualify as disabled under the old listing may no longer qualify when the list is revised.

We won’t know the full extent of the changes for a few years, as the listing contains 10,000 jobs that will need to be reviewed.

We expect the critics of the Social Security disability insurance (SSDI) program will be coming out of the woodwork over the revelations of a “fraud bust” involving more than 100 people last week. The Wall Street Journal notes that Congress is pressuring the Social Security Administration (SSA) to “rework the system” for determining how beneficiaries are awarded.

The justification for that pressure, however, is often suspect. While the most recent fraud case is rather ostentatious, in the big picture of the SSDI program’s total payout, which in 2012 approached $140 billion, this incident is hardly the reason the program is facing a shortfall of money in the near future.

Congress, which contains many of the programs harshest critics, carries virtually all of the responsibility for that shortfall. They increased eligibility for the program, and rightfully so, over the last two decades.

The SSDI program provides a very necessary benefit for many disabled workers, and for many is far from generous. Nevertheless, the growth of the number of beneficiaries is a necessary outcome of such expansions.

While the administrative law judges are often blamed for being too lax in restricting SSDI benefits, again Congress bears much of the culpability. As the program grew, the SSA had difficulty handling the volume, and because of many hiring freezes and other congressionally imposed budget limits, ALJs saw their workloads grow until some were unmanageable.

Certainly, some ALJs probably approved some cases with minimal review. They may not have had much choice, as they were pressured to push through as many decisions as possible to reduce the backlog.

Given the current climate in Congress, we fear this latest incident will merely provoke more outcries for cuts to SSDI; adequately funding the agency would be the best means of reducing fraud.

Many veterans make a significant sacrifice during their service. They risk their life and limb while serving their country, and when they return, it is right and fitting that we provide support for those who have been injured in that service. From obvious physical injuries, like lost limbs from IEDs and gunshot wounds, to the less obvious, but equally debilitating psychological impairments, they are left unable to return to their prior jobs or obtain new ones.

Too often, upon returning, they would receive a disability rating from the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA). One would think this would allow them to easily apply for Social Security disability insurance (SSDI) benefits. This, however, is not the case.

One problem is the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) backlog in claims processing. The rising number of applications for SSDI has meant a nearly constant backlog for the last decade or more, and while SSA has been able to reduce it at time, it is still averages more than three months in most parts of the country.

If you need to appeal a denial, the time can increase to a year or more. With this as a backdrop, the SSA has announced new plans to move veterans’ claims to the high-priority list that receives an expedited review.

Of course, this does not lower the eligibility requirements for veterans, meaning it is just as important as ever to obtain assistance when assembling your SSDI application. The change will mean your claim will be looked a more quickly, but it will still be denied if it is missing documentation or other necessary information.

When a worker suffers a disabling illness or injury, they often wind up applying for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits to help pay their rent and buy their groceries. The SSDI program pays benefits to those with severe physical and mental conditions that leave them out of work for at least a year and make returning to work unlikely, if not impossible.

However, some recipients of SSDI may experience an improvement in their health, and new research suggests that it may be the SSDI program that helps them to recover and eventually return to the workforce.

The research looked at a large number of SSDI beneficiaries who lost their benefits when Congress changed the eligibly requirements. The study found that some of those who quickly received their benefits, had a greater likelihood of being able to return to work and earn more than they would have been about to earn under the SSDI program’s income limits.

There has been much discussion on how to limit the size of the SSDI program. Helping disabled workers return to work would assist with that goal, but the report suggests there are limits.

It found that workers with drug or substance abuse problems had a better chance of returning to work than those with chronic health conditions. Individuals with heart disease did not see an improvement in their rate of returning to work, which is unsurprising.

Chronic diseases, like heart, lung or liver ailments often do not improve, even with access to health care, and disabled workers suffering from these conditions are unlikely to see their health improve sufficiently to allow them to return to work

According to the Census Bureau report, analyzing data from the fourth quarter of 2011, 49.2 percent of Americans live in a household where someone receives “food stamps Medicaid or other programs.” There was a slight uptick in households with the elderly receiving Social Security and Medicare, but the largest increases went to the poor.

With the very weak job market, many people misinterpret the data that shows increases to Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) in the last few years as meaning the unemployed are applying to SSDI after their unemployment benefits are exhausted and using it as an extended unemployment insurance program.

The only cases where that could happen would involve someone who had suffered a physical or mental impairment and been out of work for 12 months or more. And this may happen, for instance, where an individual has worked in a manual labor trade, like health-care aid or landscaper, and injured their back by years of heavy lifting.

Because they do not have training for sedentary work, with their injury, they will be unlikely to find any work. Their injury will leave them disabled and would allow them to obtain SSDI benefits. Of course, they would need to apply for SSDI and have their application approved.

With many office workers out of work, those with less training and experience have little chance of obtaining employment in a less strenuous line of work.

A challenge for any government benefit program is to control costs. The Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program is a case in point. The program offers financial support for low-income individuals who are blind or disabled.

Children are eligible for the SSI benefits and it can provide an essential supplement for parents and caregivers who often face many difficult struggles while coping with the costs of doctors and hospital visits, prescription drugs and other healthcare equipment.

From an administrative point of view, these programs can see ever increasing expenses due to beneficiaries being added to the program when they are young (children can be eligible for SSI from birth), and spending their entire life receiving benefits. And allegations of fraud are always being raised as the costs for the programs increase.

One way to help children on SSI become capable of no longer needing the program is to provide them with the education and job training that enables them to obtain work as adults.

A new demonstration initiative, PROMISE (Promoting Readiness of Minors in Supplemental Security Income), was announced by the Department of Education, the Social Security Administration (SSA) and the Departments of Labor and Health and Human Services and will take place in 11 states.

The program will attempt to coordinate services for children on SSI and improve their education, training and eventual job prospects.

If successful, these demonstration projects could be rolled out in all the states and help children nationwide. It would also provide a benefit to the Social Security Administration by slowing the growth and the expense of the program.

A 2-year-old may be many things, but disingenuous is generally not one of them. Aside from not really understanding the concept, they are typically the opposite, saying aloud what many people may think, but would never utter. So, with all the allegations of fraud within government disability programs like Social Security disability insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental security income (SSI), one would not suspect that a 2-year-old would present a questionable case for benefits.

In Philadelphia, a 2-year-old girl suffered damage to the nerves of her arm during birth. A condition known as Klumpke’s palsy, it results from an injury to the shoulder of a child, often by being wrenched during birth. It causes paralysis in the arm and is usually permanent.

She is an otherwise a happy, active child, but she is beginning to become frustrated with her disability. She should seemingly qualify for a disability program like SSI, as her parents earn less than the federal poverty guidelines for a family of three, in spite of her mother working two jobs as a health care aid.

Their application for SSI has been denied three times and they are now appealing the decision to a federal court. While reports often surface regarding fraud and abuse with disability programs like SSI, a professor of disability policy from Brandeis University noted that “SSI rules are byzantine and too strict,” and that families that should be able to obtain benefits from SSI are denied.

It is always unfortunate when people with genuine disabilities and needs are denied benefits because the system has been made so complex by efforts to prevent fraud.

For many people, obesity is a lifelong problem. Try though they might — often due to genetic or hereditary factors — people fail to lose weight. For these and many other people, obesity is not a choice, it’s an unfortunate condition to be dealt with. In some cases, people’s physical condition don’t allow them to work a regular job. For these people, applying for Social Security disability benefits might be a viable option.

Obesity is considered by some to be an epidemic in this country. In fact, as many as two-thirds of Americans are considered to be obese or overweight. Researchers have spent billions of dollars trying to find ways to implement meaningful solutions for a mass audience, but haven’t had much luck.

That’s why some researchers are proposing extreme measures to fight the obesity epidemic. One scientist at the Rand Corp. wants to force restaurants, for example, to standardize portions so that a meal in one establishment has the same number of calories as another. This would likely be extremely problematic; among other reasons, it would diminish the individuality of restaurants and, consequently, their appeal.

Another suggestion is to limit the number of fast food outlets permitted to be in a particular city or neighborhood. This would make it less convenient for people to get fattening food, but it seems as though other unhealthy options would pop up in their place.

Regardless of potential solutions to obesity as a medical condition, people who are affected may be eligible to receive Social Security disability benefits. An experienced SSDI attorney can be a big benefit to someone in this situation.