Do Psychiatric Conditions still carry a stigma? Does the Office of Personnel Management, or the Merit Systems Protection Board, treat Psychiatric medical conditions any differently than, say, bulging discs, degenerative disc disease, or carpal tunnel syndrome, etc.? Is there a greater need to explain the symptoms of psychiatric conditions, in preparing an Applicant’s Statement of Disability, than conditions which can be “verified” by diagnostic testing? Obviously, the answer should be: There is no difference of review of the medical condition by OPM or the MSPB.
Certainly, this should be the case in light of Vanieken-Ryals v. OPM. Neither OPM nor an MSPB Judge should be able to impose a requirement in disability retirement cases involving psychiatric disabilities, that there needs to be “objective medical evidence,” precisely because there is no statute or regulation governing disability retirement which imposes such a requirement that “objective” medical evidence is required to prove disability. As I stated in previous articles, 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,” the evidence presented concerning psychiatric disabilities should not be treated any differently than that of physical disabilities. As the Court in Vanieken-Ryals stated, OPM’s adherence to a rule which systematically demands medical evidence of an “objective” nature and refuses to consider “subjective” medical evidence, is “arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law.” Yet, when preparing the Applicant’s Statement of Disability, it is always wise to utilize greater descriptive terms. For, when dealing with medical conditions such as Bipolar disorder, Major Depression, panic attacks, anxiety, etc., one must use appropriate adjectives and “triggering”, emotional terms — if only to help the OPM representative or the Administrative Judge understand the human side of the story.
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: Clarifications of Laws or Rules, Mental/Nervous Condition | Tagged: anxiety & panic attack in the Postal Service, anxiety and depression, attorney for US government employees, Bi-polar disorder in OPM disability, Bipolar Disorder in the Postal Service, bulging discs opm disability retirement, carpal tunnel syndrome and your federal job, civil service disability retirement, CSRS disability retirement federal attorney, degenerative disc disease, different medical conditions in federal disability retirement, emotional distress at the Post Office, established diagnostic criteria on mental conditions, federal laws retirement, federal workers with panic attacks, FERS CSRS mental and/or nervous condition, Health Conditions and the Federal and Postal Employee, level of stress, low back pain and your federal job, Major Depression cases in the USPS, medical disability lawyers opm, mental handicap in federal workers, Merit Systems Protection Board and OPM disability, MSPB Administrative Judge (AJ), objective medical evidence for federal disability cases, Office of Personnel Management (OPM), OPM Representative, OPM subjective methodology, OWCP disability, OWCP medical treatment, panic attacks and federal disability retirement, Post Office disability, postal workers injury attorney, postal workers owcp rights attorney, psychiatric conditions, psychiatric medical conditions, psychiatric medical disabilities, psychologist, resources for injured federal workers, sick leave in OPM disability, social stigma on psychiatric medical conditions, stress disability for federal employees, stress in federal jobs, the Vanieken-Ryals case, US Postal Disability, USPS disability retirement, Workers Comp disability, workers comp for letters carriers | 1 Comment »
