Fibromyalgia is one of those medical conditions that the Office of Personnel Management systematically “targets” as a condition which is prima facie “suspect”. This is despite the fact that there are cases which implicitly “admonish” OPM from engaging in the type of arbitrary reasoning of denying a disability retirement application because they “believe” that “no objective medical evidence” has been submitted, or that the “pain” experienced (diffuse as it might be) is merely “subjective”, or that the chronicity of the pain merely “waxes and wanes”, and a host of multiple other unfounded reasonings. Yet, cases have already placed a clear boundary around such arbitrary and capricious reasonings.
A case in point, of course, is Vanieken-Ryals v. OPM, a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit case, decided on November 26, 2007. In that case, it clearly circumscribes the fact that OPM can no longer make the argument that an Applicant’s disability retirement application contains “insufficient medical evidence” because of its lack of “objective medical evidence”. This is because there is no statute or regulation which “imposes such a requirement” that “objective” medical evidence is required to prove disability. As long as the treating doctor of the disability retirement applicant utilizes “established diagnostic criteria” and applies modalities of treatment which are “consistent with ‘generally accepted professional standards’”, then the application is eligible for consideration. Further, the Court went on to state that it is “legal error for either agency (OPM or the MSPB) to reject submitted medical evidence as entitled to no probative weight at all solely because it lacks so-called ‘objective’ measures such as laboratory tests.” Statues are passed for a reason: to be followed by agencies. Judges render decisions for a reason: for agencies to follow. Often, however, agencies lag behind statutes and judicial decisions. It is up the an applicant — and his or her attorney — to make sure that OPM follows the law.
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: Clarifications of Laws or Rules, Important Cases, Legal Updates and/or the Current Process Waiting Time, Mental/Nervous Condition, Specific Medical Conditions Tagged: | attorney help in cases of muscles pain, civil service disability retirement information, csrs psychological disability, Department of Defense workers under Workers Comp, disability retirement opm, disabling mental nervous conditions, DOI disability retirement, eligible for disability retirement fers, established diagnostic criteria on mental conditions, fatigue, federal employees with nervous conditions, federal usps retirement disability, federal workers comp denying claims on fatigue problems, federal workers with sleeping and fatigue problems, FERS CSRS mental and/or nervous condition, FERS medical retirement, fibromyalgia and federal disability retirement, Fibromyalgia in OPM disability retirement, generally accepted professional standards, information applying for fers disability, injured federal employee, interpretation of federal disability law, Justice Department employees disability benefits, long lwop for nervous or mental conditions, medical benefits for civilian federal workers, medical conditions that OPM targets unfairly, medical retirement postal workers, mental or nervous disabling conditions, misinterpretation or misapplication of OPM disability law, musculoskeletal diseases in OPM disability retirement, neurologists narrative for FERS CSRS disability claim, objective and subjective medical evidence, OPM "difficult" disabilities, OPM arbitrary reasoning, OPM subjective methodology, OWCP and cases disturbed sleep and severe fatigue, OWCP disability, Postal disability retirement, Postal workers with fatigue and sleep disturbances, sleep problems, statutes and regulations governing disability retirement law, the Vanieken-Ryals case, tips for winning a Fibromyalgia case, US laws and statues of OPM disability retirement, USPS disability retirement, usps rural carrier injury, when "objective medical evidence" is not necessary, when the OPM rejects medical evidence, your treating rheumatologist