Federal Disability Retirement: The Appearance of Perfection

You’ve seen those adds — 99,9% Success Rate!  Or even the 100%, Money-back guarantee.  (Well, if they are willing to give you back your money upon a failure, how is it successful?  Or, of course, the fine details of the agreement will say, for instance — minus any administrative costs that must be deducted, etc.).  There is some truth and honesty to the matter, of course, in that “appearance” of perfection is not the same as perfection itself; but it is the purpose of “appearing” to be perfect without attaining the vaunted status of perfection that is the whole point, is it not?

Somehow, even though we all know that perfection cannot ever be attained (precisely because the two concepts, “perfection” and “man” are incommensurate, as the former requires transcendent precepts unsullied by flaws and mistake-ridden potentialities and the latter is too often defined by qualities lending to errors), we become persuaded that there is a possibility of “near-perfection”, which is no perfection at all but at least is akin to, or has the appearance of, that which we know can never be attained.

Then, of course, there is the matter of how one has attained the appearance of perfection — what class of content has been excluded in order to make that appearance of perfection; how have the percentages of “success” been defined, etc.  There are any number of ways to attain the appearance of perfection, but this we know: The methodology of contorted manners in which the appearance of perfection is reached, is never defined by perfection itself.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, consult with an OPM Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law.  While “perfection” may never be attained, you will at least know that a realistic assessment will be provided in evaluating your case, and not some blather about one’s appearance of perfection.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire