In attempting to understand others, it is important to gain a perspective from which the third party views the world. Understanding the third party perspective is a way to formulating an effective way of persuading a change in that person, if that is the goal. Or, perhaps understanding X merely in order to accept the behavior or actions of the individual, is enough of a reason.
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 important to understand the perspective of one’s treating doctor in order to obtain the necessary support and administrative initiation of the medical provider.
From the doctor’s viewpoint, it is normally counter-productive in terms of treatment and therapy to declare, ascertain and deem that the patient is “totally disabled“. Work is therapeutic; it allows for a teleological motivation which compels continuation in recuperative and rehabilitative terms.
Further, when this “fact” is combined with the general exposure of most doctors to other forms of disability benefits — state or federal OWCP benefits; Social Security Disability benefits; private disability insurance benefits — and rarely an encounter with FERS or CSRS disability retirement issues, it becomes apparent why doctors often become reluctant and resistant to getting involved with the administrative process. OWCP benefits require an assertion of causality-to-employment; SSDI necessitates a declaration of “total disability”; private disability policies can often lead to depositions and legal responses.
Thus, everything that is counterintuitive to a doctor’s perspective of what is therapeutically beneficial to the patient, is potentially there when presented with a request for support in a disability retirement case.
Explanation is the key to understanding; effective explanation should persuade and alter a perspective founded upon a misinformed foundation. It is often necessary to explain the differences between FERS & CSRS disability retirement benefits and the “others” which have previously polluted the waters of a pristine stream of thought.
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: OPM Disability Actors - The Doctor | Tagged: a common and visible scene: the doctor's perspective in disability claims, advising your treating doctor about your opm disability application, attorney representing federal workers for disability throughout the united states, bear in mind the different actors and perspectives in an opm disability case, CSRS disability retirement federal attorney, Federal Disability, federal disability retirement, FERS disability retirement, hesitancy in applying for fers deisability benefits, hesitation comes from unfamiliarity, how important is your physician's cooperation for a fers disability claim?, how to seek the support of your treating doctor, law firm representing clients in opm disability law all across america, nationwide representation of federal employees, obtaining cooperation from family doctor, OPM disability retirement, owcp disability retirement, Postal disability, postal service disability retirement, reasons that explain some doctors' hostility toward federal disability retirement, representing federal employees from any us government agency, securing cooperation from your doctors is very important for usps disability, the doctor's misconceptions about federal disability retirement, the opm disability application from the perspective of your physician, tips for dealing with your treating physician, USPS disability retirement, viewing your federal disability claim from the perspective of your physician, why physicians hesitate to help the postal worker?, why some doctors hesitate to "disable" a disabled federal worker?, why sometimes doctors won't cooperate with the disabled federal workers, your federal disability attorney can help to secure your physician's cooperation, your treating physician will not know much about opm disability laws | Leave a comment »
OPM Disability Retirement: What Ifs
“What Ifs” are hypotheticals which can paralyze a process. Often, such imaginary road blocks are pragmatic irrelevancies, and are better left alone. Others, one should affirmatively confront.
Thus: “What if my Supervisor says…” There are things in one’s control, and those which are not. A Federal Disability Retirement application contains an implicit concept which must not be forgotten: It is actually a Federal Medical Disability Retirement application. What the Supervisor says or doesn’t say is not ultimately relevant. Can the Supervisor’s Statement have an influence or impact? Obviously. But it is not one of those things which should be worried about, because it is beyond anyone’s control — for the most part.
“What if my doctor won’t support my case?” This is a hypothetical which one has control over, in filing for Federal Medical Disability Retirement benefits. As such, one should make an appointment with the doctor before starting the process, or even contemplating starting the process, and have a frank discussion with the doctor. Bifurcate those issues which one has control over, from those which one does not. In filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS or CSRS, one needs to confront the reality of today, in preparation for tomorrow’s future.
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: Pre-Application Considerations | Tagged: a doctor's comments are more important than a supervisor's comments in an opm claim, civil service disability, CSRS disability retirement federal attorney, deciding what medical documentation is relevant to your opm claim, ensuring a supportive physician even after opm application, ethical issues when filing the 3112b form, federal disability retirement is primarily a medical issue, fers disability application supervisor comments, FERS disability lawyer, FERS disability retirement, focusing on the main medical issues of your illnesses or injuries, getting the medical support you need for your federal disability case, how to seek the support of your treating doctor, law firm representing clients in opm disability law all across america, neutralizing negative statements from supervisor's statements in sf 3112b, OPM disability lawyer, OPM disability retirement, owcp disability retirement, postal service disability retirement, remembering that opm disability retirement is primarily a medical issue, representing federal employees from any us government agency, should I find another physician to support my opm claim?, super, supervisors' revenge against Postal workers, the 3112c form, the doctor's support for owcp and opm medical claims, the limited power of a supervisor in the fers disability retirement process, the most and the least important actors fers disability retirement, the relevant medical information in opm disability, the supportive physician, trying to change things you have some control over, usps disability and the support of a doctor to your workers comp claim, USPS disability retirement, usps form 3112c, why the sf 3112b matters less than the doctor's statements, why your doctor's support is critical to your opm disability claim, worrying about keeping your doctor on your side under workers comp, worrying about things out of your control | Leave a comment »