A veil is an article of clothing which hides part or all of a person. It is worn with the intention of concealing. The history of Western Philosophy, from the time of Plato to the 20th Century writers such as Heidegger, is one encompassing the tension between reality and appearance, of concealment and revelation; in its simplest form, a struggle between truth and falsity.
Studies in psychology have shown how people often see what they desire to see, and self-justification is a force within man’s psyche which allows for actions beyond the moral sphere to be engaged in; for it is man who makes the law, and can provide the linguistic elasticity of rhetorical flourishes in order to abide by them.
In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, it is often the case that the Federal or Postal worker has entirely convinced and persuaded him or herself that one’s own Federal Disability Retirement application is “self-evidently” an eligible case. But clearly there is a distinction between an “eligible” case and one of “entitlement”, where the former must be proven, and the latter merely applied for. As to the former, in a Federal Disability Retirement application, one must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that one fits into the latter category.
Remember that a “veil” can do more than one thing — yes, it can conceal, but it can also deceive, and self-deception can be the result of placing a veil over one’s eyes. For, as a veil can conceal from the perspective of the “other”, so it can hinder the viewpoint of the person it conceals.
The necessity of objectivity in preparing and formulating a Federal Disability Retirement application is almost always without question. The fact that the Federal or Postal employee experiences the medical condition is not the basis for an automatic approval from OPM; far from it — it is the ability to prove a case which must be the deciding vehicle of a Federal Disability Retirement case.
Robert R. McGill, Esquire