Ultimately, a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS or CSRS is not a science, in terms of a mechanistic approach and methodology in determining the successful outcome of a case. In law, there is always a distinction to be made between truth, evidence, and persuasive argumentation. It used to be that the middle term (evidence) provided for the latter concept (persuasive argumentation) through the strength of the former term (truth).
Science always relied heavily on the first two terms, believing that the strength of the first two determined the last term by logical default. But once “science” began engaging in valuations and judgments based upon projected possibilities of future occurrences, the art of persuasive argumentation took on greater prominence in determining the truth, and the “evidence” to be presented became less important.
Similarly, in preparing, formulating and filing a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS or CSRS, because there is not a computational calculus in determining whether or not a particular Federal Disability Retirement application meets all of the legal eligibility criteria, it is not a “perfect science” and, indeed, it is not a science at all.
A human being at the Office of Personnel Management must determine whether or not the applicant under FERS or CSRS is eligible for Federal Disability Retirement benefits. As such, a fair amount of subjectivity comes into play.
The “art” of submitting a persuasive Federal Disability Retirement application — where the spectrum of objectivity is greater at the medical evidence side of things, and where human emotions and descriptive delineation of the impact of the medical condition upon one’s ability/inability to perform the essential elements of one’s job will be more apparent in the Applicant’s Statement of Disability — all combine to present a totality of evidence mired in subjective/objective compendium of the whole — for a presentation of the truth.
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: Theory and Practice: Tips and Strategies for a Successful Application | Tagged: a federal attorney's legal methodology and approach, accepting opm disability clients all across america, approaching your opm disability claim in a persuasive manner, attorney representing federal workers for disability throughout the united states, considering opm's methodology, Federal Disability, federal disability retirement, fers disability doesn't have a mathematical formula of eligibility, FERS disability retirement, how does the opm determine fers disability eligibility, how to get a federal workers claim or opm disability application approved, is federal disability retirement a science?, is fers disability retirement a science?, nationwide representation of federal employees, objective medical evidence for federal disability cases, OPM disability retirement, owcp disability retirement, Postal disability, postal service disability retirement, pragmatic methodology, proper argumentation as an efficient tool to get your owcp disability claim approved, representing federal employees from any us government agency, the science of the legal method as applied to opm disability cases, USPS disability retirement benefits |
Leave a Reply