Student wants Social Security to refer denied disability applicants to job services

The Honorable U.S. Representative Rodney Davis

Springfield District Office

2833 S Grand Ave. East 

Springfield, IL 62703

Dear Mr. Davis, 

I am writing to you to advocate for the bill Promoting Opportunity for Disability Benefit Applicants Act (H.R. 3310).  It amends titles II of OASDI and XVI of SSI of the Social Security Act to allow the Social Security Administration to provide information on appropriate public or private places that provide employment services, vocational rehabilitation services, or other support services to individuals who are denied OASDI or SSI benefits based on an adverse determination of disability. 

This bill needs to be passed to help those who are living in (or at risk of falling into) poverty after they suffer an injury or illness that causes disability. Perhaps their disability is not so severe that they qualify for disability benefits, or perhaps there are technical reasons why they do not qualify for SSI or Disability Insurance (perhaps they have too many assets to qualify for SSI).  If people who are denied disability benefits can find a job suitable for their abilities, they will be able to support themselves. But, if they are denied Disability Insurance or SSI and they cannot find a job that will match their abilities, what can they do? 

Those who are denied Disability Insurance benefits or SSI will either need help finding a job or else they will need other forms of benefits to prevent their becoming homeless or malnourished. Surely it will be better to help such persons find work, if work can be found. If the Promoting Opportunity for Disability Benefit Applicants Act is passed, the Social Security Administration would direct the many (over 60% of persons who apply for disability benefits) who are are denied  the benefits they seek to services that could help them find appropriate jobs matching their situations. These referrals should lead to many persons finding appropriate employment. For these successful job seekers, they will not need to utilize the as many welfare programs because they will have full time work. They will be able to get insurance through their work instead of being on Medicaid. They will be able to have an income, so they will not need to rely on SNAP for all of their food. By passing this bill, the country will be saving money on welfare programs. There will not be as many homeless people on the streets or in shelters. People will be able to take care of themselves by having resources gained through jobs that they are able to do. They will be able to become more self-sufficient and independent. 

This bill will help people pay taxes because more people will get jobs and that happening will increase the taxes that come out of their checks, which makes the United States have more money. Our country needs money and this will lead to more people in the workforce.  Certainly, most people prefer to be self-reliant and employed if they can be. I hope you agree, and will support bills like H.R. 3310, and generally advocate for more services that help persons with disabilities find employment or opportunities, especially when they have sought services through Disability Insurance or Supplemental Security Income and had their claims denied. 

Between 2001 through 2010 the Americans seeking disability benefits and actually getting them from Social Security were only about 45 percent of people who applied. People that were denied disability benefits were 53 percent.  But, since that time, the rate of denials has increased, and fewer people who apply for benefits because of disabilities are getting anything.

If you look at this chart from the Annual Statistical Report on the Social Security Disability Insurance Program, 2016, you will see that more and more applications for Social Security Disability Insurance are being denied.

Let me quote from page 149 of the 2016 report on Disability Insurance:

Final outcome of disabled-worker applications, 2006–2015The final award rate for disabled-worker applicants has varied over time, averaging 34 percent for claims filed from 2006 through 2015. The percentage of applicants awarded benefits at the initial claims level averaged 23 percent over the same period and ranged from a high of 25 percent to a low of 20 percent. The percentage of applicants awarded at the reconsideration and hearing levels are averaging 2 percent and 9 percent, respectively. Denied disability claims have averaged 62 percent.

Please note that.  The Social Security Administration is denying 62 percent of claims for Disability Insurance. Does it seem to you plausible that 62% of those who apply for DI are actually not worthy of such benefits?  Surely Americans tend to be a hard-working and industrious people, and we have good work ethics, and I cannot believe that 62% of those who reach the desperation of applying for Disability Insurance do not deserve such benefits. Nevertheless, whether they deserve or do not deserve disability benefits, they clearly need help finding work, and H.R. 3310 would do just that.

According to the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty, people that are denied disability are likely to become homeless. This is because after denial, they cannot find work, and if the Social Security Administration would help these people find work, vocational rehabilitation services, and support services, many people would not be homeless. Social Security denies so many people for disability because they think there are certain jobs that they can still do, but the person whose application has been denied may think there are no jobs they are capable of doing. Therefore, it is very helpful to give them resources to help them find those jobs that they will be able to do. For example, a person that got denied may be able to do a job that is not as high functioning as what they have tried in the past, and they can get help with this from the Social Security Administration. If you will support H.R. 3310 and help it get a hearing in committee and then eventually get to the House floor, I hope I can proudly tell my friends and neighbors about your support of this excellent legislation and your demonstrated commitment to helping people become self-sufficient.

  Your Obedient Servant and Constituent,

     [ Student in SWK-355 Policy and Services course ]

Student describes personal value of SNAP, SSI, and Medicaid

In my opinion, this student offers a convincing personal testimony about the value of SSI, Medicaid, and SNAP as programs that help persons with disabilities enjoy a better standard of living. These programs prevent the sort of desperate poverty and malnutrition we don't want in our society. 

Since I became disabled at the age of sixteen I have received a lot of government assistance, which has helped me survive and get by. The first assistance I can remember receiving was Supplemental Security Income when I turned eighteen. The Supplemental Security Income program was established during the Nixon Administration. It was essentially a restructuring of the Social Security Act’s public assistance programs for blind and older Americans. The program assists poor people aged 65 or older as well as blind people and people with disabilities. People with disabilities, like myself, are the largest group in Supplemental Security Income clients. “Disability” is defined under the Supplemental Security Income guidelines as a “physical or mental impairment that prevents substantial employment activity and has lasted or probably will last for a least a year or may result in death. As I stated before I started receiving Supplemental Security Disability when I was eighteen and I am still receiving it today at the age of twenty-three. I am grateful to be able to have this income because it has helped me be able to support myself while being a full-time student and has also helped be able to provide for my son over the last two years. Although for me it is not an ideal income to survive on forever, it has been an amazing benefit to have over the last seven years of my life since I have been unable to work. 

[Back in the 1990s when I was a graduate student the Social Security Administration published an interesting report authored by Sata Kochhar and Charles G. Scott describing all the different sorts of disabilities among SSI recipients the prevalence of various conditions.  That report is still available online.  For the most recent data (which is not at all detailed like that 1995 report was, you can go to the Statistical Yearbook from Social Security, and see that (in December of 2016) 5.8 million SSI recipients were disabled, 1.2 of these were both blind and disabled, and only 1.2 million were elderly.]

One thing I have been blessed with my entire life is private insurance from my mom. It has been a blessing to never have to worry about going to the doctor or getting my medicine. Before having Medicaid, having private insurance was a huge benefit to me and my family. I was life lighted to a hospital when I had my car accident and my private insurance covered every penny of my twenty plus thousand-dollar helicopter ride. I am explaining the ways that private insurance has benefited me because I also want to explain how it has hindered me in ways since becoming disabled. The situation I am going to use is when I was still doing physical therapy and my private insurance was basically slowly trying to kick me out of physical therapy all together. They began limiting my monthly visits and time to an amount that made it almost pointless to go anymore. At that point my physical therapist and doctor began trying to get my private insurance to cover a ‘sit to stand’ machine that I could have at home since I was not going to be able to use one at therapy for very much longer. The sit to stand was a machine that I could transfer into that would lock my knees into place and let me slowly pump the machine up to a standing position. It was a great way for me to stretch my legs, bare weight on my legs and let my insides breath from a normal body position. This sit to stand machine would provide multiple benefits for my body.  

I went through a couple different companies applying for a sit to stand machine in hopes of getting approved for it. But it wasn’t until I received Medicaid that I finally was approved for the sit to stand. After being denied multiple times by private insurance, I was approved on the first try with Medicaid, and I could not have been happier. Because of Medicaid I was able to continue my therapy from home and not have to worry about getting the proper exercise I needed. Today even when my private insurance won't cover all or part of a bill, Medicaid almost always covers the costs. Medicaid is a major health program and helps millions of people like myself. To explain Medicaid more, it is a federal grant to states that helps finance health care for the poor. Federal regulations specify the basic health services that must be offered under Medicaid. Yet, services are primarily administered by individual states including decisions regarding the duration of services and optional services. Medicaid is a “vendor system” which means payments are made directly to the service and provider. Many recipients of Medicaid are families with Temporary Assist to Needy Families (TANF). However, the most Medicaid dollars go to people who are blind or have other disabilities. Furthermore, most Medicaid spending on older Americans is for nursing home care. 

Another program that has been a big help in my life since becoming disabled is food stamps. The Food Stamp Program (now called the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program) was designed to help end hunger and improve nutrition and health. It helps low-income households buy the food they need for a nutritionally adequate diet. The Illinois Department of Human Services administers the program in our state, but at the federal level the program is administered by the Department of Agriculture. Food stamp benefits can be used to buy any food or food product for human consumption, plus seeds and plants for use in home gardens to produce food. Benefits are provided through The Illinois Link System, an electronic system that allows someone to use a plastic card, like a bank card, at grocery store check-outs. Most households with low income can get food stamp benefits. I started receiving food stamps when I moved out of my mom’s house at the age of nineteen. When I first moved out I moved into an income-based apartment complex by myself, so I only received around $65 when I lived there. After I moved out of my apartment and into a house I was renting for quite a bit more money, they increased my monthly amount to around $195, which was awesome. I was always able to keep my house stocked with food throughout the entire month. Once I had my son, my monthly amount increased to around $320 and it has been an absolute blessing for my son and me. My son has been blessed to be able to have all the food he has ever needed in his two years. Without the help of my food stamps, I would not have been able to keep food in my refrigerator and cabinets a lot of the time. 

I know one of the articles I came across had some older information, but the key points of these programs were still clear. In my opinion, although some of these programs may be flawed in certain ways, they are none the less beneficial to those truly in need. Without federal and state programs like I mentioned, among many other assistance programs, people like myself would not be able to survive or provide for themselves and/or their families.

References

Current Issues and Programs in Social Welfare. (2017, October 30). Retrieved February 24,

2018, from https://socialwelfare.library.vcu.edu/recollections/current-issues-and-programs-in-social-welfare/

Illinois Food Stamp Program. (n.d.). Retrieved February 24, 2018, from

https://www.benefits.gov/benefits/benefit-details/1260

A student's favorite welfare policies

First Reaction Essay

One social welfare service I like is the program LIHEAP. It stands for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program. According to the Illinois Department of Commerce & Economic Opportunity, it helps low income families pay for home energy services, usually their heating bills in the winter. The yearly eligibility levels are made depending on funding and cannot exceed 150% of the federal nonfarm poverty level. According to LIHEAP’s website, 3.03 billion dollars was released in the Federal Fiscal Year 2018. This was regular block grant funding from the Office of Community Services (OCS), Division of Energy Assistance (DEA).

  The reason I like LIHEAP is because as a social work student and a decent human being, I don’t want anyone to have to go cold in the winter. It makes me sad to hear about families and especially children getting sick because their houses are so cold, and they cannot afford to pay for their heating bills. I don’t see how someone could want to destroy what LIHEAP does. I do think that there should be more funding with LIHEAP because I know from experience that places like CEFS (a nonprofit Community Action Agency) in Taylorville did not have any more money to help with the LIHEAP program, so people in poverty that lived in Taylorville were not able to pay their utility bills if they could not afford it. 

Another program that I like is SNAP. It is another program for low income people. SNAP helps people with making sure they have food. It gives people a card and puts money on it that they can spend on food. I think SNAP is really important because without it, I know a lot of people in poverty would go hungry. I hate when people talk badly about people who receive SNAP because they need It to survive. People always think that the people who get it do not use it wisely or are committing fraud with it, but I’d rather have someone who uses it on junk food than for his or her children going hungry at night.  People going hungry in the United States would be a lot worse without SNAP. It is still bad with it, but it could be much worse. I have received SNAP in the past and it helped feed my whole family, and I am very thankful for it. 

The last program that I like is Supplemental Security Income or SSI. According to Social Security’s website, this program helps aged, blind, and disabled people who are low income by providing them with cash. It is different than SSDI because this program is for people who have not worked enough to earn the amount of work credits required for SSDI. SSI is funded by general tax revenues. I like SSI because without it, so many disabled people would be homeless with no place to go. They cannot just get a job like most people say because they cannot work like everybody else because of their disability. I know that to get it, it is a very long process because the government does not want people to get SSI unless they know for sure that they are disabled. I do not like when people say that people are on SSI and SSDI just because they are lazy and do not want to work because that is not true for a large amount of people who are in the program. I think people on SSI should be given more money because I know someone on it, and they do not get more than 800 dollars a month, and that is not enough money to live off of. 

There are other programs and services that I like and have an opinion on, but these were just the most important to me. I really care about programs that help the poor because I have been poor my whole life, and I wish people did not have to worry about when their next meal would come or if they would have somewhere to live in a month or if they would be able to have heat in their house during the winter. Nobody deserves that, and I think we should help out people as much as we can. 

References

LIHEAP and WAP Funding. (n.d.). In Liheap Clearinghouse. Retrieved from https://liheapch.acf.hhs.gov/Funding/funding.htm

Utility Bill Assistance. (n.d.). In Illinois Department of Commerce & Economic Opportunity. Retrieved from https://www.illinois.gov/dceo/CommunityServices/UtilityBillAssistance/Pages/default.aspx

What Is Supplemental Security Income? (n.d.). In Social Security. Retrieved from https://www.ssa.gov/ssi/

This is a great way to write a reaction paper.  We could all make a list of the social welfare policies we like the most, or the ones we think ought to be  least controversial. But, for the sake of discussion, let me offer some points.

LIHEAP is necessary and valuable because it prevents persons from freezing to death or perishing from heat exhaustion. So, yes, we need it or something like it.  And yet, as an environmentalist and as someone who keeps my house at 16 degrees C (60 degrees F) from mid-November through early April when I can turn off the heat, I am concerned that persons with LIHEAP benefits may keep their apartments or homes far too hot through the winter. I don't like going into the homes of persons living in poverty during the winter and finding that their homes are heated up to 25 degrees (77 F) and everyone is sitting around in t-shirts and shorts.  People could keep their homes cooler, wear sweaters, jackets, long-underwear, and so forth and be just as comfortable, but waste less energy.  If we all were using renewable energy, I wouldn't mind so much.  

SNAP is necessary to prevent starvation and malnutrition.  Some people who complain about SNAP suggest we could just get charitable donations and provide soup kitchens, breadlines, food pantries, and food baskets for poor persons to prevent malnutrition.  In fact, we already do this, because SNAP benefits are insufficient, and some people who ought to get food assistance don't get anything. Even now, the government wants to make sure able-bodied (and healthy minded) adults of working age can only qualify for SNAP benefits for a limited time.  The idea is to push people into employment where they can earn enough to feed themselves, but I question whether wages offered by some employers do provide sufficient income for people to house and feed themselves. Many persons receiving SNAP now are already working full-time.  So, I think SNAP is too stingy and too difficult to keep. SNAP is a wonderful policy for farmers, food producers, and food retailers (grocery stores), and while poor persons get the food benefits of SNAP, it's important to recognize that the money ends up in the hands of local businesses (grocery stores, food companies, and farmers).  

SSI is another great program, I agree with you about that.  I also agree that SSI benefits ought to be increased. The one problem I have with SSI is a problem for which I can't figure out a solution.  It is this: we know that for most people with disabilities, if they would get a job and work on a regular schedule, this would have great benefits for them.  Yes, some persons are so profoundly disabled that this isn't an option, of course.  But, most persons with disabilities do have talents, strengths, ambitions, and abilities, and they would be happier and better off if they used these qualities at least for a few hours each week in some sort of employment situation, where they could interact with coworkers, improve their skills, and contribute something to a collective effort (a business is one sort of collective effort, but there are others worthy of consideration for employment). So, I wish SSI had a way of helping more persons receiving benefits to get employment.  And yet, our system of defining disability and awarding SSI benefits takes a nearly all-or-nothing approach. And we often reduce benefits in such a way that there is very little incentive for persons to work.  I wish we had a way to encourage and support more persons with disabilities to get some form of employment, but I wish we could do this in a way that wasn't financially punitive, and I'm against any system of coercing persons with disabilities to enter the work force and desperately keep jobs even if those jobs may be unsuitable or unwholesome.

Adults with Developmental Disabilities

Reflection Paper

In class we talk about many different populations of people, but I think that one that gets overlooked is adults with developmental disabilities. I worked in a sheltered workshop for a little over 7 years and have seen first hand the kinds of financial difficulties they have. Just like children, these adults, don’t have much of a voice when it come to their own personal finances. Most of them do not understand the concept of money.

A lot of adults with developmental disabilities live in group homes. Much of their financial income is determined by the state. They are covered by Medicaid, SSI, SSDI and some receive SNAP. According to the Social Security Website most are covered by SSDI (87%), if their parents had a work history and the person was diagnosed before the age of 18.  I knew a few others that qualified for Black Lung Survivors Benefits.

Case workers scrambled to make sure that no one clients savings got over $2,000 for fear of them losing benefits. A couple years ago there was a panic when they reduced the amount of cash that was disbursed every month to clients in ICF group homes. For most it went from $60 to $50 or $40. Ten or twenty dollars does not seem like much to most, but they use that for things most people take for granted. Haircuts, a coffee, new shoes, clothes, or entertainment. Often clients that went to the workshop could not go on any outings that month because they lacked the funds. These were not extravagant outings. They were things like going to get a coffee, ice cream, or go to the zoo. 

A good thing was the clients never had to worry about healthcare, housing, or food. That was covered. When they got $60 a month that put them at $2 a day for cash. They were better off than pretty much everyone in the book $2 a Day since they don’t have to worry about food or shelter. These people can not advocate for themselves, although some try their best. One client from an ICF home knew that he would only get a certain amount of cash each month no matter how much he worked. It was sad to see some of the clients that had no concept of money working every day, sometimes making upwards of $200 a paycheck. They never get to see that paycheck. They get the allotted $40-$50 and the rest goes towards their room and board. 

Like anyone else, disabled or not, we want independence. Many of these clients could make a wage enough to pay for outings, clothing, haircuts, entertainment, or anything else that they need without going without new shoes for several months due to lack of cash funds. A higher functioning client wanted so badly to get out of the workshop and into the community working. She walked everywhere, went to interviews, and eventually landed herself 2-part time jobs while working at the workshop. She wanted to better herself and make enough money to do the things she loved. Since she was bringing in “too much” income she had to start paying into Medicaid.

I know there must be limits to what people can get because I can see it getting out of hand. Where is the line drawn though? If you increase their benefits so they have more cash, then that money is probably coming out of some other program. If you let them make as much as they want without losing benefits the state will be losing money. I believe that every adult with a developmental disability should be able to keep what they earn. Obviously if they make an obscene amount of money then yes, they should pay for some of their benefits. I don’t see the harm in them keeping what they earn.

A short observation on poverty and programs

Here is a short student paper with my response.

Poverty

            Why are so many people in our country living below the poverty line? Is the poverty line not set a reasonable level?

            I think that our country has flaws in the system currently that make it almost impossible for many people to get out of poverty once they enter it. It is obviously not a desirable option for anybody. Unfortunately many people do not know where they can go to get assistance or are denied the accessibility. It is than likely whenever a person applies for disability assistance, they are denied the first time and must apply multiple times. Alright, so they are already disabled, yet they must wait and go through the process multiple times before they get any help? That sure does not make any sense to me and is only one of many flaws in our system. Why are we not trying to help the people that need it?

            In addition to the problems of our system denying help to some people who clearly need it, we also have the problem of people getting assistance when they do not need it.  It seems to me that in many cases we need to more tightly control how we help people. There are people who use their LINK card to buy alcohol or trade with others. I am also aware of people who are using SSI or other forms of assistance to buy drugs. I do not support this in any way, but that is how the people are trying to survive. Maybe drug tests needs to be put into effect to get specific forms of aid.

            Poverty is difficult, this is a fact. There are ways to get out of poverty and to help yourself, but people do not where to go or what to do. There are also people receiving aid that probably should not. Our government system needs to be fixed so that we can help those that need it.

As we squeeze those who receive benefits so that we catch the undeserving ones who cheat, we will increase administrative costs and inconvenience the ones who are honest and do need the money, and we are likely to deny some benefits to those who really deserve it.  Likewise, if we make it easier for people to get benefits, and deny fewer claims for programs such as SSI, we are likely to allow more dishonest and unworthy applicants to get benefits. This is the way the world works.  Given a willingness to allocate a certain percentage of program costs to administration and regulation, we can choose to be tight-fisted and deny more worthy applicants or use a more open hand and allow more undeserving to get benefits. Spending more on administration and regulation might reduce both types of problems, but at some point it becomes ridiculous to devote too much money that could be helping worthy applicants to hunting for the less worthy.  This is sometimes called the “unavoidable error” problem in social welfare policies.  Given large and complex systems that give out benefits to people, error will occur.  Which error do we prefer, the error of too much regulation and control, or not enough regulation and control?  Are we more concerned with being too generous and having cheaters take advantage of us, or of being too stingy and denying help to those who deserve it and would greatly benefit from it?  If we spend 20% of some welfare budget to administer and control it, is that somewhat like stealing from those who should be getting benefits to support swarms of parasitic bureaucrats, social workers, investigators, and paper-pushers, or is 20% a reasonable amount?  What about 10%, or 30%?  At some point we have to accept a bit of sloppiness and a bit of error. You can’t have a perfect system.  A system that denies a few worthy applicants and allows a few cheaters may be the optimal system, so long as a very small percentage of worthy applicants are wrongly rejected, and a very high percentage of would-be cheaters are discouraged or caught, and all this is achieved with a very low percentage of program expenses going to administrative costs and a very high percentage 

A letter about SSI and work incentives

Dear Senator Durbin:

I am writing as a constituent of Illinois. My name is ______ ________ and I am 22-years old. Growing up in New Lenox, IL I have been the fortunate recipient of luxuries such as an outstanding school district, well maintained roads, and a remarkable park district. Never, would I have thought to criticize the government, locally or federally. Yet, as circumstances would have it, my world was turned upside down in the summer of 2003. Having suffered a spinal cord injury after a diving accident, I was rendered a quadriplegic. The newfound limitations of paralysis and incurred medical expenses eventually put me in contact with the U.S. government’s Social Security department. After years of interacting with this agency I have come to conclude that the disabled population continues to be provided little incentive to integrate into the employment sector.

As I am sure you know, the Supplemental Security Income Program (SSI) makes cash assistance payments to the aged, blind and disabled people who have limited income and resources. Tax revenues generate the funds, for which this program operates. The current maximum asset level, to continue eligibility for SSI, is set at the sum of $2,000. Given that I was a young, permanently disabled student attending high school, I quickly qualified to begin receiving benefits. Despite having an active case with the Department of Human Services (DHS), sub agency Department of Rehabilitation Services (DRS), and now Social Security, I was never given an overview of the program’s specifications.

For one to fully encompass the expenses of a disabled individual one must consider medical expenses (including specialized equipment, medication, and services), cost of accessible transportation, the money necessary to employ a personal assistant, and costs associated with accessible housing. With the male medium income around mid-40k and the female medium income estimated to be around mid- 30k in this country, the incentive to work begins to diminish when considering the monetary gains versus loses.

Hidden amongst the regulations of SSI are work incentive programs and individual exceptions. In particular, the Student Earned Income Exclusion allows recipients under age 22, who regularly attend school, to earn up to $1,640 in additional income per month. Yearly maximum exclusion is restricted on amounts exceeding $6,600. Some additional qualifications do apply. Another exception includes having a documented Plan to Achieve Self-Support (PASS). The PASS allows recipients to set aside other incomes besides SSI for a specified period of time so that the individual may pursue a work goal. Under the PASS program, money that has been set aside does not qualify towards the determining of SSI payment amount.

At first glance it appears that the 2009 Federal Benefit Rate set at $674 should be more than adequate for individuals working towards employment, especially, given that the may supplement this income by applying for previously mentioned exclusions. However, these exclusions do little to assist individuals if their existence goes unbeknown to SSI recipients.

This is where the opportunity for change exists. Every recipient of SSI is assigned a caseworker. Often, these same recipients have additional client-agency relationships established at other government run locations (such as my example with DHS and DRS). It would be pertinent if these networks collaborated on client casework. At minimum, there should be regulations within the Social Security Administration that mandate employees fully brief SSI recipients on all the options available to them. I will go so far as to suggest specific emphasis on programs such as the Student Earned Income Exclusion and PASS. In promoting and fostering employment pursuit and training to disabled individuals, the US government demonstrates its support of individuals with disabilities as valuable citizens. Furthermore, it disrupts the cycle of dependence and spiraling US debt.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Issues with SSI benefits and casemanagers

I thought this was a well-crafted short piece examining some of the issues and complexities of the SSI benefit policies.

When it comes to assigning people certain amounts of SSI for different disabilities and things, I think case managers making the overall decisions need to be more aware of the person’s situation. For some people receiving SSI is an excuse to not hold a job or contribute anything worthwhile to society. And then others are kept from receiving these benefits. For instance when alcoholism is listed as someone’s main medical problem – they are kept from receiving SSI benefits.

Here are two examples.

A young man in our community who is developmentally disabled, but he’s also an alcoholic. His doctor listed alcoholism as his main problem, keeping him from receiving SSI, something that he truly needs because he is not developed enough to hold a steady job. The thing keeping him from holding a job isn’t alcoholism.

There’s the other side of the coin as well – the diabetic alcoholic who receives SSI because their main medical problem was diabetes. So he gets a SSI check every month, but rather than using it to eat properly, he uses it to go buy alcohol, thus making his diabetic issues worse and worse.

It’s hard to say that one person deserves SSI over another. I can’t even imagine being the person in the position to set down those rules and those standards. It’d be nice if it were the sort of thing that could be looked at differently from person to person, etc and so on. Perhaps it’s time to do something like that. To start looking at individual circumstances when it comes to handing out SSI and moving forward based on those circumstances and how they fit into the whole. Sometimes a simple set of standards is just fine to get by on, but other times things need to be shifted and changed to put everything in right order.