FERS Medical Retirement: Mind/Body Distinction

Perhaps in other cultures, different civilizations, foreign philosophical foundations, the distinction was never made.

In the West, the “Cartesian model” — of Descartes’ alleged search for truth and the bifurcation between the “physical” universe and the “cognitive”, subjective phenomena; and, of course, the Freudian focus upon that inner consciousness and subconsciousness which further divides the objective from the subjective.

In the East (generally speaking, and of no geographical or geopolitical ascriptions of borders or boundaries), there never was a separation of the mind from the body, as the two were intimately and inseparably connected.  Tai Chi is based upon this concept, as are the martial arts (Tae Kwon Do, Hapkido, Karate, etc.).   The mind is considered as an extension of the body, and in reverse conceptual order, the body is merely part of the mind.

Whether the Mind/Body distinction itself is the culprit for so many ills in Western societies (of treating psychiatric conditions, as an example, as something separate from a physical manifestation of a condition), is a question left for science.

For Federal Government and Postal Service employees, however, who are contemplating the need to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under the FERS system, the important thing to note is that applicable Federal law does not make a distinction between “mental” conditions as opposed to “physical” conditions.

Both are valid reasons to file for a Federal Disability Pension under FERS code, and this attorney always reminds OPM that under the case-law, there is no discrimination of validity between one or the other.

Contact a FERS Disability Retirement Lawyer who specializes in OPM Disability Law, and let not the Mind/Body distinction so prevalent in the West defeat a valid basis for an OPM Disability Retirement application under the FERS retirement system.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill
Lawyer exclusively representing Federal and Postal employees to secure their Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

 

Federal Medical Disability Retirement: Of Life’s Bindings

What is it that binds us to life?  We are well aware of those things which unbind us — loss of family and friends; major changes; upheavals; divorce; medical conditions.  The things which unbind us from life are those which create havoc, extend joylessness beyond mere momentary emotions, etc.

The things which bind us to life are those events, encounters and elements which enliven us, reinvigorate our spirits, and compel us to a level of energy which declares to the world, “I am alive. I want to contribute.”

Of life’s bindings: Helping young people to find their bindings of life; Of learning how to maneuver through the maze of complexities and challenges which daily living brings to the fore; Of having a special relationship with others; Of having a loyal dog beside you; Of work which is satisfying, and of which you are competent and successful; of health.

The last of these are often taken for granted; yet, it is always the first on one’s list of life’s bindings when it begins to fail.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers whose health is beginning to fail, and where the failure of health impacts one’s ability and capacity to continue in the career of a Federal or Postal employee, the time to consider preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application for submission under FERS to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is — now.

Don’t wait until the primary basis of all other of life’s bindings begins to fail — of one’s health — where the dominos begin to fall and knock down all other of life’s bindings.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill
Lawyer exclusively representing Federal and Postal employees to secure their Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

 

Postal & Federal Employee Disability Benefits: Consider the Alternatives

It is a cognitive activity which we must all do — or, at the very least, which is forced upon us even when we don’t want to.  It is interesting how some people are simply unable to engage in the mental process of such consideration — whether because they were never “taught” how to sequentially weigh and prioritize, or because the “making” of the decision puts too great a finality upon one’s life.

In either case, it is often necessary to consider the alternatives, then to make a decision, then to act upon the decision.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, the foundational basis in coming to a decision to file for Federal Disability Retirement under FERS, through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, consist of a 3-fold question:  How is my health?  Can I make it to “regular retirement”?  If I continue in my present circumstances, will my health suffer such that if I make it to regular retirement, I will not be able to enjoy it?

In the end, considering the alternatives is a matter of prioritizing one’s life — of health versus work, of now versus the future, of values versus things, etc.  To become better informed in order to properly consider the alternatives, contact an OPM Disability Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and take that information in making the proper decision for your life, your future, and the alternatives which you may not even know about.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill
Lawyer exclusively representing Federal and Postal employees to secure their Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

 

OPM Disability Retirement Denials: Selective reasoning

Of course, we all engage in it; some, merely by withholding certain known facts; others, by emphasizing and asserting portions of the logic employed while ignoring or deliberately averting the focus of other aspects.  Selective reasoning through deliberate omission is the height of pragmatic oppression; for, when it is accomplished with knowledge and self-admission of premeditation, it involves a mind that knows the difference between proper application of logical reasoning and the intentional misrepresentation of facts.

We engage in such folly during the course of normal fights and argumentation; for, to win is the basis of arguing, and the ends often justify the means.  Logic is a learned tool.  It is the foundation of sound reasoning.  It is not an inherent, in-born or even in-bred character of man, but it can bring out the evil therein.

As a tool, those who are good at it have a greater responsibility to use it wisely, honestly and with proper motives.  It is the “selective” part of the reasoning that makes for honesty of dishonesty in the reasoning process, and the anomaly and irony, of course, is that the process itself — of reasoning — necessarily involves selectivity, for logical argumentation encapsulates proper and effective selection of facts, syllogistic approaches and propositional logic all bundled into one.

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management engages in selective reasoning, and their denials of Federal Disability Retirement applications reveal a level of such selectivity that one must conclude that it is being done intentionally and with deliberate knowledge.

Beware of denials; for, they try and make it appear as if you never had a chance to begin with in your FERS Disability Retirement application. OPM will selectively choose to extrapolate from various medical reports and records, and fail to mention or highlight the selective portions omitted, then reason that there was “insufficient” medical evidence despite facts and rational argumentation to the contrary.

Do not despair, and do not simply allow for the 30-day time period in which to file for Reconsideration to lapse; for it is precisely such selective reasoning that is meant to discourage, and to make you think that the denial is dismissively disproportionate so as to justify giving up altogether — which is precisely what their selective reasoning is meant to accomplish.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement under FERS & CSRS: The sparrow

It is a bird that remains unappreciated — that generic entity which, when not identified by the wandering ornithologist, is simply referred to as a “sparrow”.  They are like the “default” bird, unassuming, pervasive, lost in the underbrush of time and history, and are taken for granted in their existence, presence and attraction — sort of like most of humanity.  One doesn’t hear the wandering bird-lover with his or her oversized binoculars strung heavily around a neck that is straining from a disc herniation from the sheer weight of the magnifying mechanism suddenly stop and declare loudly, “Look — a sparrow!”

People walk by throughout the cities of the world without ever noticing the thousands of such generically-forgotten creatures; those brown little blurs that fly about singularly or in large groups; flitting about, searching for sources of food, flooding the air with their chirping and fluttering.  But then, most of humanity is somewhat like the sparrow — in great numbers, never standing out from the rest, and merely trying to break out from the anonymity of life’s toil.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition where the medical condition begins to prevent the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job duties, the sense that can remain as a “sparrow” of sorts becomes less of a possibility — but not because of any unique features that have suddenly been noticed by the plumes of one’s species; rather, you have suddenly been noticed and selectively chosen precisely because of the medical condition itself.

Suddenly, you have become the narrow focus of greater observation:  Leave Restrictions are imposed; your performance is reviewed with greater interest; harassment ensues; the magnifying glass of the Federal Agency or the Postal Service is upon you.

Once upon a time, the sparrow was flying about happily unnoticed, perhaps wishing to be a peacock, not knowing how fortunate it was to remain in the abyss of anonymity.  For the Federal or Postal worker, to be noticed can have some negative effects, and it may be time to begin to prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, lest the sparrow that wished to be a peacock suddenly realizes the looming shadow of a predator overhead, bearing down rapidly to end the anonymity that was lost because of a medical condition.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Medical Retirement under FERS & CSRS: Static

It is the lack of movement or change which is the undesirable aspect of anything, and not necessarily the thing itself.  Perhaps there was never anything wrong with the substance or essence of the thing; the person remains, and yet, the lack of progress, the inability to move forward, the unresponsiveness to the contextual alterations and modifications — the world around changes, but the singular resistance is in and of itself that which negates.

Being “static” — of the lack of movement or change — is normally thought of as a negative perspective upon an entity.  It would be one thing if the nature of being static were to be an appraisal upon, say, an Aristotelian type of “god”, where the so-called Unmoved Mover is “static”, but all else constitutes a universal movement, but of a specific kind: movement towards the perfection of the Unmoved Mover.  But that is not what we are referring to when we speak about being “static”.  Instead, most of us ascribe a negative connotation, as in, “the inability to change or adapt when the context and circumstances necessitate it.”

That is often the problem with Federal and Postal employees who suffer from a medical condition, where the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of the Federal or Postal position.  For, the person him/herself has not really “changed” — aside from the medical condition itself, the essence of “who” the person is has remained static.  However, the circumstances have altered, in that one’s physical or cognitive capacity and ability have altered, normally in a way that no longer allows for a congruity or consistency with the type of positional duties required of one’s job.

Thus, in such a context, to “remain static” becomes a negative component of life, and requires and necessitates a modification of sorts — and preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, filed though the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS offset, is the first step towards breaking away from the negative mold of “being static”, and like the disruptive sounds that crackle like static electricity over a phone line or the sudden shock one feels when wearing a wool sweater, being static can only lead to worsening conditions if one delays in preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Disability Retirement for Federal Government Employees: The Hub

It is the center of the universe; upon and around it, all things revolve.  The axle is attached to it; the spokes; the planets that circle about; the hub constitutes, represents and relates to all else by being the primary foundation from which all else is dependent and subservient.  And thus the phrase, “That’s the hub of it all, isn’t it?”  Or, is the idiom, “That’s the nub of it all” the true way of saying it?  If a person replaces the “h” for the “n”, and let’s say he or she has a strange inflection or accent, anyway, do we stop them and correct them?

Say two people are watching a show, and afterwards a discussion ensues as to the meaning of what one of the characters said or failed to say, and one says to the other, “That’s the hub of it all, isn’t it?”  The other turns and says, “You mean, that’s the NUB of it all, don’t you?”  The other pauses, reflects and retorts, “What’s the difference?”  Now it is the first one’s turn to pause, reflect and answer back, but what would be an appropriate answer?  While the true idiom or adage may well be the “nub” usage as opposed to the “hub” application, perhaps the other person was just being somewhat eccentric and creative.

Or, let’s say that you knew of the other person the following: When he was just a young boy, he lost his mother, whom he loved very much.  Her last words to him as she lay in bed suffering from tuberculosis was: “Now, remember Bobby, it is love — that is the … [and, here, she was overcome with a fit of uncontrollable coughing, and could not get the “n” out and instead, pulled herself together and said hoarsely] the hub of it all.”  And to this day, Bobby remembers his mother’s last words, and the slight difference of idiom used, and likes forever after to repeat the phrase, “That’s the hub of it all”.

Would you, knowing this, correct him on the misuse of the idiom?  And even if you didn’t know the history of such misusage, why correct something when the underlying meaning remains the same?  Isn’t “hub” a synonym for “nub”, and vice versa?

In life, we too often focus upon the spokes of the wheel, and not the hub; or, put another way, we walk right past the nub of a matter and become too easily distracted by tangential, irrelevant or insignificant obfuscations.  But life is too short to aim at the spokes of the matter instead of the hub, nub or essence of it all.

For Federal and Postal employees who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition is beginning to prevent the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal job, just remember that there are certain things in life that cannot be ignored — like one’s health.

If one’s health is deteriorating and the Federal or Postal job is contributing to that deterioration, what is more important?  What is the hub of the matter?  What essence of life’s priorities are more important?  Identify the nub — and proceed on to prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, so that you can focus upon the hub or nub of the matter, which and whatever, so long as it points to the essence and not the spoke.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal & Postal Disability Retirement: Youthful mind, decrepit body

The oxymoron of the objective world; yes, it can perhaps be maintained in the virtual reality of cognitive dissonance, but the human body warns and tells all.  The basic problem is that while the “mind” retains an image of frozen time, the body continues upon the progressive course of constancy in deterioration.

We all have an image of ourselves, and no matter how many times a day we look into the mirror, that “image” remains with us, as we are not the one’s watching ourselves as we grow older.  Yet, the body ignores the image we hold, and time, nature and the linear disintegration of organic matter leads to the consequences of a decrepit body.

We are reminded of this when we do silly things – like challenge a high school kid to a game of one-on-one after not having played basketball for a fortnight and a decade; or join in a pick-up game of football or other activity upon a dare, a challenge or an embarrassing invitation in the public’s realm of sight and sound; and though we may try and ignore the body that has advanced by the call of Nature’s echo, the reverberating results scream in the morning’s light as the human body resists the image beheld.

There are, of course, sad exceptions to the “youthful mind” counterpart – of dementia and early onset of cognitive deterioration; but of the decrepit mind, there is no offset, though by cosmetic surgery and other artificial means, we may fool the image reflected in the mirror to somewhat match that which is beheld in our minds.

It is this constant bifurcation and mind-body dissonance that allows for old men to act foolishly and young men to laugh uproariously.  Somehow, the disconnect between the youthful mind and decrepit body has never quite overcome the incommensurate nature of the two; but, then, perhaps that is why Aristotle’s primary focus was upon the rationality of man as the defining essence of his being, knowing that the far greater value resides in the area more populated by angels than by aging bones.

For the Federal employee and U.S. Postal worker who is getting ready to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or even CSRS Offset, the greater travail imposed by the mind-body problem may well come to the forefront in preparing one’s Statement of Disability on SF 3112A.

For, rare is the instance where either and both are not impacted, even in the case that the primary medical condition is psychiatric and not physical, and vice versa, if the focal illness is physical and not psychiatric.  For, the mind can be impacted in other ways beyond the formal diagnosis of a psychiatric condition – by loss of mental acuity, profound fatigue that goes beyond mere daily exhaustion; and how the two are intertwined may be important in later years if the U.S. Office of Personnel Management sends out a Medical Questionnaire and you are recovered physically, but not mentally, or again in reverse order, recovered mentally, but not physically.

In the end, the general rule of “normalcy” of having always a youthful mind while one’s body continues to become decrepit, can be defied only to a limited extend; but for the Federal or Postal employee who is seeking Federal Disability Retirement benefits, the interconnectedness of both is important to consider in preparing, formulating and filing an effective OPM Disability Retirement application.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Postal & Federal Employee Disability Retirement: Foreground-background

Perspective is always an important component in all that is seen, done and accomplished.  For, without it, a self-contained sense of importance in light of irrelevance and insignificance always seems to dominate.

Seen from afar, standing in the background, can we always determine that which constitutes the background, as opposed to the foreground, of an individual or perspective some distance away?  Does a myopic vision constrict and further complicate, where we miss the details some distance beyond and make assumptions and presumptions to the detriment of a more “balanced” viewpoint?  Or, what of “tunnel vision”, where the peripheral views are restricted, and we are left with a centrality of focus but lacking in taking into account the contextual surroundings often necessary to determine a more accurate assessment?

In appreciating a painting or a photograph, does shifting one’s vantage point make a difference, even when the reality of the object observed reflects a one-dimensional canvas covered with colors and pigmentation which alters not despite nearness or farness of viewpoint?  Of the child who has not yet figured out the difference between a bucket and a photograph of a bucket – and raises himself on his tiptoes to view what is inside of a bucket upon a table, and does the same when viewing a picture of one (or in a supermarket line in trying to discern the cleavage of a magazine’s cover), is it important to recognize the distinction between foreground and background, and if so, at what age and why?

How does one attain a level of balanced perspective, and who determines when such achievement is arrived at?  Are we just born with the capacity and ability to calculate, assess, evaluate and analyze, and the natural outcome of conclusions derived are to be entrusted merely because “it is so” and the innate character of inherent superiority of man’s solutions can be applauded?  Does unwavering certainty by tone of voice and utterance of words deserve no suspicion of questioning?  Or, if a person comes along and says confidently, “Trust me”, we are to do so merely because – what?  If we walk through a dark forest and see afar a clearing where the sun has opened a spot of visual beauty, does it matter what constitutes a foreground as opposed to a background when the undisturbed scene asks not a question of impertinence or care?

In every situation, one’s background should be taken into account, in determining the relevance of the foreground to be assessed.

For the Federal employee or U.S. Postal worker who intends on preparing a Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the importance of “how much” background to impart must be balanced with the foreground to be detailed, and it is always the combination of both which will determine the ultimate effectiveness in the preparation, formulation and filing of a Federal Disability Retirement application.  Foreground provides for the content of a background inserted with instrumental brevity, and too much background can dominate to make the foreground appear less compelling.  Perspective is always important, and a reasoned balance between background of a case, providing contextual information to understand the foreground of the narrative, is essential in the effective formulation of a Federal Disability Retirement application before the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS & CSRS Disability Retirement: The Appointed Time

In days of forgotten yesteryears, we acquiesced with submissive aplomb to the notion that fate was predetermined, that time was merely the dangling strings of unknown gods directing our every movement and thoughts by invisible attachments extending into the ethereal heavens beyond the realm of sights, sounds and concrete buildings; but, somehow, compassion and empathy would balance out the injustices of the universe and the finality of judgments would be rendered to equalize the uneven scales of an unfair world.

The “appointed time” was thus merely the breadth of the allowance between the playful whims of fated forces beyond our control, and the daily toil of sweat and pain.  But as science and technology progressed and pragmatism of success began to crowd out the magic of unknown universes, the belief that man was merely the playthings of gods and cauldrons mixed with livers and kidneys of dead critters consumed with incantations of mysterious languages lost in timeless capsules of goblins and ogres, the notion that destiny was somehow within one’s grasp and control began to intercede, and the age of man began to interrupt the rise of giants and the fall of knaves.  People began to take control of their own lives.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who continue to toil for the large bureaucracy of Leviathan proportions, those former days of dangling fate seem not very far in the distant past.  For, it is indeed the Federal Agency and the U.S. Postal Service which have replaced the serpents of history, and treat Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers with disregard and disrespect; and when a medical condition begins to impact the Federal or Postal employee’s ability and capacity to perform all of the essential elements of one’s positional duties, one often feels as if the medical condition itself is like the “appointed time”, where fate again is predetermined by the gods now replaced by the bureaucracy of the Federal agency and the U.S. Postal Service.

That is why preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is likened to circumventing the desires and whims of the gods of fate.  Obtaining Federal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM allows the Federal and Postal employee to determine and take control of one’s future course of actions, such that the appointed time of yesteryear remains merely a residue and vestige of a time long forgotten, where man was merely the plaything of the gods of fate in a time before the dawning of a brighter promise for tomorrow.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire