Federal Disability Retirement: The Logical Beginning Point

The consequences of information overload is that many people no longer have the cognitive capacity to make proper decisions concerning logical beginning points.  Studies have been made, with varying results, but with some indicating that the constant barrage of technological over-exposure results in stunting of that part of the brain which is generally used for making affirmative decisions.

While multi-colored MRI scans make for interesting visual commentary, from a scientific viewpoint, all that can properly be stated is some loose correspondence between certain areas of the brain and a level of activity or inactivity which can be correlated.  Regardless, it would seem logical to assume that too much of anything can negatively impact the capacity of the individual to competently engage in other activities.  Application of energy in one sector will necessarily take away the requisite capacity of engagement in another.

For the Federal or Postal employee who is suffering from a medical condition, and who is also subject to the identical volume of information overload, one may posit that life-changing decisions to be made would be exponentially exacerbated with difficulties of the fundamental nature:  “Where do I begin?”

The beginning points in preparing, formulating and filing a Federal Disability Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management are important first steps; what consequential impact such beginning points may have upon the ultimate outcome of a case will determine the future destiny of the Federal or Postal employee.

With such important issues on the line, it may well be prudent to consult with someone “in the know”, and not let the arbitrary winds of change dictate the future course and destiny of one’s life.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Medical Retirement Benefits for US Government Employees: Filing

The actual filing of a FERS Disability Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, can be rather anti-climactic, precisely because the prospective anticipation is merely beaten down by the long wait and the extended period of inactivity.

Thus, in the prior two phases of the administrative process — the “preparation and formulation” part of it —  the engagement in obtaining and completing the forms, presenting in written form and putting the entire Federal Disability Retirement application together, creates an appearance of progressively working towards a goal.  Once filed — if still with the agency or within thirty one (31) days of being separated from the Federal Agency or the U.S. Postal Service —  the agency must complete their portion.

Depending upon whether it is with the local Human Resources Office or the District Human Resources Office will often determine how efficient or helpful they are.  If a Federal or Postal employee has been separated from Federal Service for over thirty one (31) days, of course, then it must be filed directly with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management in Boyers, Pennsylvania.

Filing a Federal Disability Retirement application is both a physical act, as well as a psychological barrier to be broken; as to the former, it is a relatively simple matter of sending it in; as to the latter, it constitutes an important step in recognizing and acknowledging the necessity of attending to one’s medical needs for recuperative purposes, whether because of physical or psychiatric medical concerns which require an alteration of employment demands.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Federal OPM Disability Retirement: The Simplicity of the Complex

It is not the forms which make it complex — although, the instructions which accompany the filling out of the Standard Forms make it appear more convoluted than necessary. Federal Disability Retirement for FERS & CSRS employees of the Federal Government and the U.S. Postal Service is actually quite simple in conceptual terms, and in the process of attempting to win an approval from the Office of Personnel Management, we encounter the complexity of the entire administrative process, thereby overlooking the simplicity of the actual law underlying the process. That is why it is often a good idea to periodically pause and “go back to basics” before moving forward on a disability retirement application.

As stated multiple times, disability retirement is essentially the linking of a “nexus” between one’s medical conditions, and one’s Federal or Postal position. By “linking” is meant the following: Does the medical condition from which one suffers prevent one from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s job? If the answer to the question is “yes”, then you have passed the preliminary, fundamental, preconditional question.

The next question, or series of questions, of course, include the following: Do you have the minimum of 18 months of Federal Service (for CSRS individuals, 5 years)? Do you have a supportive doctor? Will your medical condition last for at least 1 year? These are just some of the basic, preliminary questions to ask, before considering the option of filing for Federal Disability retirement benefits. The questions and answers themselves are simple; as one gets more and more involved in the process, they become, in combination, procedurally and substantively a complex issue of meeting the legal criteria for approval. Underlying it all is a simple conceptual basis; the complexity comes in applying the law.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

CSRS & FERS Disability Retirement: Is there a higher standard of proof for Psychiatric Disabilities?

I am attempting to address the issue of Psychiatric medical disabilities in the context of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS & CSRS, by addressing the issue from various perspectives and angles, in an effort to inform the reader in different ways.  Major Depression, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, panic attacks, Bipolar Disorder — each possess unique traits, characteristics, and symptomatologies and manifestations exhibited in ways specific to the psychiatric condition. 

What is often the case is that, while the Psychiatrist is the medical doctor who is the “expert” on the Psychiatric condition, it is often the psychologist (the “Ph.D”), the Therapist, the Licensed Clinical Social Worker, etc. who has the “personalized” knowledge of the patient, who can provide the descriptive emotional impact, and the specific adjectives which can properly be formulated to reveal and “prove” the impact upon one’s inability to perform the essential elements of one’s job. 

Often, the Psychiatrist is merely the “medication manager” — the prescriber of the psychotropic medications.  Thus, in proving a Federal Disability Retirement case by a preponderance of the evidence, it is often necessary to have both the Therapist, as well as the Psychiatrist, in a joint effort to meet the standard of proof.  Is there a higher standard of proof in a Psychiatric medical condition?  To some extent, the answer is yes — but this is only natural, inasmuch as it requires “more” to have people fully understand the nature, extent, and impact of what it means to have a psychiatric medical condition.  For, at its very essence, who among us can truly understand what it means to be overwhelmed by a psychiatric medical condition?  Only words — descriptive adjectives and emotive-concepts, can draw us closer to having at least some rudimentary understanding.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Federal and Postal Disability Retirement: Are Psychiatric Disabilities Denied More Readily?

I am often asked whether or not it is more difficult to get disability retirement benefits under FERS or CSRS based upon a psychiatric medical condition (e.g., PTSD, Major Depression, Anxiety, panic attacks, Bipolar Disorder, etc.).  Does the Office of Personnel Management deny a disability retirement application which is based solely upon a psychiatric condition?   Should a FERS or CSRS disability retirement application always include a physical condition? The short and simple answer is an unequivocal “No”. 

Let me provide a slightly more expanded answer:  (1)  In my experience, psychiatric disabilities present no greater obstacles than physical disabilities.  So long as we can prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the medical condition — physical or psychiatric — prevents one from performing the essential elements of one’s job, there really is no difference between the two.  (2)  Do not “add” a physical disability because you think that a psychiatric disability is “not enough”.  This would be a foolish approach.  Focus upon the primary medical conditions, whether physical or psychiatric, in proving your case.  (3)  Remember that disability retirement often has other complex factors which come into play — accommodation issues; certain jobs are more easily shown to be “incompatible” with a psychiatric disability (for instance, Law Enforcement Personnel who have psychiatric disabilities obviously must have the mental acuity to perform the inherently dangerous aspects of the position); and remember that psychotropic medications, prescribed and necessary for daily functioning, often have side-effects which impact one’s ability to perform one’s job.  The point in all of this is that there really is no substantive difference between psychiatric disabilities and physical ones, anymore; the societal stigma of “psychiatric medical conditions” has largely disappeared, and the Office of Personnel Management — in my experience — treats both psychiatric disabilities and physical disabilities on an equal par.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire