Federal Disability Retirement: Steps, previous and next

What happens in taking the next steps often depends upon how one has already approached the previous one, as steps form a sequence of elevating or descending cadence of activities, whereas a misstep constitutes a breach of that unbroken continuity of actions.

There is the “before” and the “after”, where each step in the travels and progression depends upon the latter, contingent upon the former, and together form the sequence of activities that comprise the conceptual singularity described as “walking”, “running”, “coordinated movement” and “advancing”, as well as a host of multiple other verbs and grammatical descriptions of various sorts.

Not every step in a formulated sequence must by necessity be consistently adhered to; for, sometimes there may be a skipping over the intended sequence, or one may by deliberated adaptation to changing circumstances disregard one, jump ahead by a series of 2 or more, or perhaps even make a misstep and recover by furiously advancing in order to make up for lost time or energy.

One may “get away” with doing that when referring to the simple act of walking or running; if, however, one is speaking about engaging a legal process, like preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, it may be important to take the mandated sequence of steps, ensuring that the previous and the next one complies with all rules, statutes, regulations and legal precedents in order to comply with all bureaucratic requirements.

Thus, for the Federal employee and U.S. Postal worker who needs to file a Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed with OPM, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the key to a successful outcome in pursuing a Federal Disability Retirement annuity is to follow precisely and accurately the steps, previous and next.

Yes, walking is something we all learned to do from infancy forward; running came naturally as a young lad needing to release the pent-up energy of youth; and progressive advancement became the paradigm to follow as adulthood inevitably came onto the horizon of our lives; but when it comes to preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, it is the steps taken, previous and next, which can determine an approval or a denial in the complex administrative process called “Federal Disability Retirement”.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Attorney Representation OPM Disability Retirement: The dreams we forego

At what point did we grow up?  For, isn’t that the underlying theme of popular depictions in modernity — of people pursuing those “bucket lists” when mortality finally touches upon the recognition that life is short, oh so brutally short?

“Growing up” is defined by most as the moment when all dreams are set aside, “reality” replaces by the whims of a chosen career, a 401-K and a trade-in of the beloved fourth-hand Beamer for a hybrid of some unknown brand.

“Responsibility” is the key term, and those childhood dreams we forego are not so much replaced but set aside in quiet exchanges of euphemisms we become so adept at declaring — of “suspending it for now”; “When we’re able to get better cash flow”; “When the right time comes”; or maybe that catch-all, “It just wasn’t to be”.  Or, maybe true love delayed the dream, and there is certainly nothing wrong with that — where a lesser sacrifice is made in order to attain a greater good or desired end.

“Giving up” things is too often thought of as something “negative”; and so we make unrealistic and unwise promises to ourselves that we will never again “give up” X or Y, and years later, the skeleton that continues to strive onward, even to the detriment of one’s own wellbeing, continues upon the empty promise despite having forgotten why the promise was made in the first place.

The dreams we forego had a reason back then; it is the “now”, when we refuse to change and stubbornness sets in, that is the real problem.  For, back then, it wasn’t actually the “dream” that was let go that was a problem at all; it was the fact that we were able to be so adaptable that revealed the strength of our character.  Now, as one gets older, it is stubbornness that becomes the problem — the inability to modify, to adapt, to change; in short, to forego in the same manner that we were able to when once we were young.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, is the “problem” one of not being able to change?

To one’s detriment — of the deteriorating health, of the constant struggle at work, and the growing awareness that one is no longer that spry chicken able to ignore the chronic pain and overwhelming anxiety; and yet, the ultimate question becomes, For what end?

Preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, is not the same animal as the dreams we once abandoned; it is, instead, another stage of one’s life, and if resentment and anxiety are growing concerns that are beginning to haunt, it is well past the time to “grow up” and begin to prepare a pathway to exit the hell that is beginning to percolate.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS & CSRS Medical Retirement: Of the worthwhile life

What determines value?  More importantly, who judges worth?  Is productivity the paradigmatic construct of comparative analysis?  For, in order to assess the greater advantage of X over Y, some methodology of an objective basis should be applied in devaluing one as opposed to appointing the other as the beneficial contestant of an evaluative conclusion; or can we just arbitrarily gauge one over the other based upon personal preferences?

Rawls has variously pointed out that we can be just as “reasoned” in our conclusions by applying a consistent model of application in the social justice arena — for example, we may decide to execute all people discovered on the East end of town who are left-handed with brown-eyes on every third Sunday of odd-numbered months, and exonerate those in the same part of town who are right-handed on every fifth Tuesday of every other year.  That is an arbitrary absurdity, one might declare, and one which fails to abide by the “rules of justice” as we know them.

Further, to diminish the value of one group based upon superficial concerns, while granting clemency to another based upon an equally unaccounted for basis, is to defy an objective application of fairness.  But if such rules are implemented by an authoritarian figure who possesses confidential information that an underworld bevy of dangerous criminals gather to conspire at the East end of town every third Sunday of odd-numbered months, and that all of the leaders of the group happen to be left-handed; and, further, that loyal patriots who are often mistaken for those same criminals likewise meet to fight against the known dangerous elements on every fifth Tuesday of alternate years, and who happen to be right-handed, would one’s judgment be different with this new information?

Certainly, the application of justice would be consistent, and there is a rationality of purpose behind it, now.  What changed the judgment of value?  Or, have we now altered the definition of the concept, like a metamorphosis of the linguistic caterpillar that, overnight, became a beautiful butterfly fluttering against the winds of historical change?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the concept of a worthwhile life often attaches itself to the level of productivity one believes one is capable of, and the capacity for which diminishment reflected in a self-image of mistaken belief is that by which it is justified.

Be wary of making decisions based upon what others have deemed to be as the paradigmatic definition of the worthwhile life; it may be that one’s own judgment is as arbitrary and devoid of substantive content as the misbelief that most of us have of the pasture being greener in the neighbor’s yard.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS & CSRS Disability Retirement: Of that unanswerable question

Why?  Or, the one which all parents dread, Are we there, yet? (as asked not 2 minutes after the engine has been turned on in anticipation of a 10-hour trip).  There is, then, the question posed by Bertrand Russell, as to the meaning of language, its correspondence to the physical world around us, and whether a truth value can attach itself to statements which fail to reflect the reality surrounding: Is the present king of France bald? Or does he have a full head of hair? As the country is currently a republic, sans a recognized king, there can be no identifiable royal head, with or without a scalp’s landscape of cover crops.

Then, of course, there is the underlying motive hidden beneath or behind.  Is a rhetorical question a question at all?  For, if the proposed query is merely to emphasize a point, but never intended to elicit an answer, and yet asked in an accented manner and an enunciated tone such that there can be no doubt as to the grammatical form posited, is it the convention of usage which negates the form, or merely the self-evident proposition betrayed by the obviousness of the context asked?

And, what if the audience is predominantly of foreigners who speak the language with minimal proficiency?  Does lack of comprehending the nuances of what native speakers of the language would easily identify as a “rhetorical” question, nullify the nature of such a characterization merely by such failure of understanding, by one’s status as a foreigner, or is it completely and fully determined by the insular and unrevealed motive of the one who asks?  And if, of that person, we ask, “Did you mean the question to be one of a rhetorical nature?” — and the only response is a mysterious, unrecognizable smile, interpreted as either noncommittal or perhaps revealing vestiges of the insane — does it still make it so?

And what of the convoluted question, if there is no judge on the bench to direct the inquisitor to “rephrase the question”, as in: What time did you enter the victim’s home when you left your wet footprints on the white rug before you stepped on the tail of the poodle and waited before the dog yelped just as you plunged the knife for which you never said you were sorry, huh? “Huh” would be the correct response, of course, before the bench would ask for a rephrasing, or in anticipation of an objection to a “leading” question — but is not a “rhetorical” question one which is “leading”, also, and do the circumstances surrounding the query matter?  Does the fact that a leading question posed in a courtroom differ from one presented by a reporter during an interview, or by a parent to a child?

Often, questions tell more about the source than of the elicited destination.  When personal choices and private timings confer the greater influences upon the manner of the answer, the mere asking of the question may be an answer unto itself.

Thus, for Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are contemplating filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, the question posed is often: Is it time for me to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits?  Or, should I wait until the Agency or the U.S. Postal Service completely destroys any quality in my life? This latter question, of course, is what can be deemed a “rhetorical” question, whether English is a second-language or a first.

As for the one preceding — well, of that unanswerable question that only the questioner can know, the mere asking of the question is telling as to the questioning nature of the answer left unanswered, like the baldness of the present king of France and the fact that there is no judge in the courtroom of common sense to direct the questioner to rephrase a question which is quite obvious by the mere asking of that question.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Federal Disability Retirement: The Default Mode Network (DMN)

In neuroscience, it represents various regions in the brain which engage in intersecting activities beyond a normal volume of interplay, and like a superhighway of liveliness, the correlative process of functioning is maintained at an exponential level of rapid-fire inter-connectivity when the human brain is not focused upon a particular task in the “outside” world, but rather, when engaged in the insular universe of daydreaming, thinking, or wandering in meandering thoughts.

Thus, the high-functioning network of synapses and neuro-cognitive hot-wires activates by default when one is at a “wakeful rest” — meaning, when the eyes are open, but focused inward as opposed to the outer environment of external stimuli and purposeful, productive activity.

The default mode is most active when the mind is passive and at rest; it is the anomaly of the brain, where the opposite occurs in relation to a subconscious characteristic of the organism.  It is this insular conundrum which also powers other mechanisms; and so when an electronic device falters, we engage a “default” mode where the inner sanctum of the wiring regenerates by reverting back to its original existence.

It is of interest that evolution favored such activity of the brain, where it awaits the quietude of self-reflection on the outside (at least in appearance, if not in reality), when the sudden increase of activity is triggered on the inside.  But that type of convex reflection of self paralleling its very opposite is what often happens in all of life; even in the rather mundane example of turning one’s back, when the knives become sharper and the stabbers come out of their cubbyholes.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition may necessitate filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal worker is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the workings of the Default Mode Network is instructive in the following way:  For the Federal or Postal employee, there is always activity even in a state of non-activity.  Productivity as judged by the “outside” world is not the only “means-testing” modality to go by.  Other things matter — sometimes hidden, otherwise overtly exposed.

The fact that you may suffer on the outside may not impact others into any greater activity of sympathy or empathetic responsiveness.  What matters in the end for the Federal employee or the U.S. Postal worker who can no longer perform all of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal positional duties, is to engage the outer world in preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed with OPM, in order that one may attain a level of wakeful rest which the Default Mode Network is seeking to accomplish.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire