OPM Disability Retirement: Deliberative Diversions

The concept can possess dual meanings — one, of a negative sense, and the other, of a more intentional, positive perspective.

Deliberative diversions, in the first category of meaning (more of a negative sense), entails an entity which attempts to engage you away from the central issue at hand.  This often occurs in political ads, where certain red-hot button issues are meant to provoke you away from more meaningful and thoughtful discussions.

It is represented most accurately by the age-old lawyer’s trick: “If you don’t have the facts on your side, argue the law. If you don’t have the law on your side, emphasize the facts.  If you have neither the law, nor the facts, on your side, then pound the table!”

Deliberative diversions, in the second level of meaning, is the recognition that focusing upon something for too long can have detrimental residual consequences, and it is a “good thing” to be deliberative in engaging in a diversion, if only to refresh yourself to go on and fight for another day.

However, there must always be a balance between the various projects of life, and as well, balance of the diversions deliberatively engaged in order to return to the main projects.  When that balance goes awry — as in having a medical condition which becomes chronic and unable to be set aside — then it is time to abandon all deliberative diversions and focus upon one’s health as a priority.

Federal Disability Retirement is meant to provide that context:  Of returning to one’s deliberative diversions once Federal Disability Retirement is attained.

Contact an OPM Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and begin to get back to a life where deliberative diversions counterbalance the major projects still in your future.

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 Law: Perfection’s Harm

It has been stated by many, that one should never let perfection be the enemy of the good; in other words, one can always delay and delay, arguing that whatever the project being attended to, the goal aimed for, it is simply not good enough because it is not perfect.

Can imperfect beings ever achieve perfection?  Or, is perfection merely the justification for procrastination, knowing that the goal which never can be attained will forever remain as a potentiality steeped in the angst of our own imperfections?

“Good enough”, of course, is a relative standard which all perfectionists are uncomfortable with; for, an employer who accepts such a standard is in danger of relinquishing high standards replaced by an ad hoc, mediocre acceptance of “less than” — which is never a paradigm one attempts to aspire to.  But perfection’s harm is of eternal procrastination; for, we can always find a reason why something is not “good enough”, without ever asking the natural follow-up question: Good enough for what?

In the abstract, “perfection” is an admirable goal to achieve, for it involves a standard envisioned by the visionary few; but in the practical world, perfection’s harm is the aspiration of a would-be god, an idol of idiocy, an apex of folly.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition where the medical condition continues to prevent the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, the procrastination resulting from perfection’s harm is that the Federal employee believes that his or her medical condition will miraculously resolve itself, and allow for continuation in the Federal or Postal job.  But that is perfection’s lair — of tomorrow, or the next day.

Contact a Federal Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and consider perfection’s harm — of the impracticality of which you already know, precisely because the medical condition itself has already established and revealed that man’s life on earth is one of perpetual imperfection.

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 for FERS employees: Poetry and Prose

The objective world reflects the insular mind; and though we expend less and less energy in modernity to engage with the former, the latter nevertheless continues to reflect the former.

Poetry is to the objective world as the morning’s dawn allows for clarity of thought.  The scent of a rose; the first snowflake; a rainbow after a thunderstorm — these and more represent the poetry of the objective world.

Prose is the rest of life — of the long and sluggish days in work and solving problems; of slogging through an especially difficult time; of marriage, family, and merely living life, for endurance and making it through the day represents the lengthy prose of paragraph after paragraph, page after page.

Then, there may be a short interlude — a line of poetry, a happy smile, a child being born, a light-hearted moment.  But then the prose of life comes roaring back, as the daily struggles overwhelm us like the darkening clouds of summer rains.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who struggle with a medical condition such that the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal worker from performing all of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job — has the prose of life extinguished any poetry left?

Contact an OPM Medical Lawyer who specializes in Federal Employee Disability Retirement, and let some stream of poetic light enter back into the lifetime of prose’s deficient enamor.

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.

 

Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Disability Retirement: Leaving Chunks Out

Sometimes, if done carefully, the abbreviated story “works” better — if the punch line makes sense despite leaving the chunks out.

For many years, I had been under the impression that I had read the full text of a major novel of stupendous length (you can guess which one it is — yes, of the Russian sort).  I later realized that it was an “abridged” version.  When I then read the unabridged version, my conclusions were: the editors of the abridged edition did a better job; the chunks left out did not add to the story, and should likely have been edited out to begin with, leaving a shorter abridged edition without identifying it as an abridged edition.  And finally: The Russian author was clearly too impressed with his own verbosity.

“Leaving chunks out” is often done in other contexts, as well — as in, responding to a spouse’s question, “What took you so long to come home?” — you leave out the fact that you had stopped off at a local bar and sat and drank for a couple hours.  Of course, the next obvious question in that context is: “How come you smell of alcohol”?

Leaving chunks out when the motive and intent is underlined by a nefarious paradigm is where the problem resides.

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management does this all of the time in their denial letters:  They extrapolate only the selective portions of the medical record which will support a denial; they will ignore “the law” and the application of the law; they will make statements which “imply” certain consequences, and multiple other actions (or inactions) which leave chunks of information out.

Contact an OPM Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and make sure and force OPM to do what they are supposed to do: Of being an objective and uninterested party in the determination of your Federal or Postal Disability Retirement application under FERS.

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 under FERS: Perspective Matters

How we see things; whether with a “positive attitude” or one colored with a negative turn; if one believes in the cause, or not; whether one’s initial reaction is one of anger and disbelief, or of despair; for, in the end, tackling issues is not a matter of right or wrong, but of how we view them.

Of course, a positive attitude alone will not necessarily get you anywhere; as reality abuts against the perspective we bring, it is often the combination of a “proper assessment” combined with our attitude and approach which makes all of the difference.  Are we seeing all of the alternatives involved?  Can a better argument be made in such a case?  Have we exhausted all of the avenues of evidentiary findings?  Have we chosen the best arguments?

G.K. Chesterton once wrote that Charles Dickens and H.W. Wells looked upon their respective fictional characters in vastly differently ways: The former, with a fondness like a father upon his children; the latter, with also a fondness — but like a butcher upon the chosen pig.  Both have a perspective of “fondness”; yet, it is an approach from very different directions.

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, Federal Disability Retirement should be an option to be considered.

A medical condition often impacts upon one’s perspective, you should consult with an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law; for, perspective does indeed matter, and the best legal representation is one which objectively evaluates all perspectives that matter.  Consult with an OPM Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and see whether or not your perspective is the “right” one.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Disability Retirement from the OPM: Chessboard of Life

Is there a difference between an “Eastern” and “Western” perspective of life?  Does the fact that we play one kind of game (Chess) while Eastern nations play another game (“Go”) give us any metaphorical insight into such differences?

The Game of Go uses the intersecting points on a line full of square spaces; on a similar-looking board (depending upon the size of the Go Board), Chess uses the square spaces themselves.  The Game of Go is a more “fluid” one, where the black and white stone pieces will fill the board at the intersecting lines, and thus can move up or down, sideways or diagonally, depending upon the initiation and response of the players to one another.

Chess, on the other hand, can only essentially move forward.  Yes, the pieces can move sideways (the knight, queen and rook, for example) and diagonally (the bishop & queen), but the object of the game is to reach the opponent’s farthest line of square spaces, whereas the Game of Go utilizes the entire board with equal value.

Do the two “games” tell us anything about the way in which we live?  Do we “view” life as a chessboard, as opposed to a Game of Go, and is there a difference in such ways where one can make a conceptual distinction between the two?

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, the Chessboard of Life becomes a “match” between yourself and the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

To “capture” their queen, you must maneuver your way past all of the threatening “pieces” of a Federal Disability Retirement application, and “checkmate” OPM with legal arguments and medical evidence that is persuasive enough.  Whether a different strategy as that applied in the Game of Go should be considered, depends upon the unique nature of your individual circumstances.

In either case, it is good to consult with a “Master” of either Go or of Chess — a FERS Disability Attorney who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement Law.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Disability Retirement Benefits: Changing Minds

How does one person change another person’s mind?  Is it through threats, intimidation, rants and raves?  Or, does logical persuasion ever come into play?”  Does the quiet voice or tone of calm alter a person’s viewpoint?  Or must it all be rage, firestorms and pounding of fists?

Of course, most people would answer in the following manner: It depends upon the circumstances.  Certainly, context matters.  Sometimes, a passionate response is appropriate; at others, a calm, soothing tone of persuasive logic.  Threats, intimidation, acts envisioning bodily harm — these, of course, are never appropriate, and one wonders whether such tactics ever really changed another’s mind, or whether the change of heart was merely for the sake of self-preservation.

To change a mind, one must become convinced about the validity, truth and sincere superiority of the other’s position, argument, perspective, stance, decision, etc.  Passionate advocacy can certainly play a role in it; systematic and logical persuasion can sometimes be the difference; and in Federal Disability Retirement cases, application and citation of the relevant and applicable laws will always be an effective tool.

For Federal and Postal employees who are filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from OPM, consult with a FERS Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and see whether or not — at the outset — the Federal or Postal Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law cannot change you mind, and OPM’s in the best course of action in the preparation, formulation and filing of an effective Federal/Postal Disability Retirement application.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement: Reminders

What is the proper balance in a person’s life — between leisure and work; between thought and living; betwixt the physical and the psychological?  How much is “too much” in getting lost in the fantasies we surround ourselves with: Of watching the news; of enjoying a movie; of “doing” Facebook posts or “surfing” the internet?

Have you ever driven on a sparsely populated road or perhaps late at night when the lights of passing cars become a blurred memory of fleeting blindness, and upon arrival to your destination, you remember not a moment as to how you got there?  Perhaps you drove and did all of the proper things in the mechanical acts of driving, and yet you cannot remember yourself having engaged in the act of driving?  How much time is spent within the insular caverns of our own thoughts — whether when “thinking” or “cogitating”, or in watching a movie?

We fool ourselves into thinking that we are “living life” when in fact all we are doing is staring into a mass of illumination pock-marked with letters and punctuations.  Then, something inevitably “reminds” us — that we have to eat in order to keep from starving; that we have to respond to a real question posed by a real person; or in the mere act of needing to take out the garbage before it begins to rot beneath the kitchen sink.  And of medical conditions — they constantly remind us of our own mortality.

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, the constancy of the imposition of the medical condition is a reminder that our deteriorating health is incompatible with continuation in the Federal or Postal job.

When the time comes where such “reminders” begin to dominate the life of the Federal or Postal employee, then it is no longer a “reminder” but of a jarring realization that no amount of getting lost in the distractions of life will change or alter the need: The need to file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Consult with an attorney to determine if such a course is the best path of action for you.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement Claims: Back to the future

The title comes, of course, from that classic 1985 movie, and depicts the idea of being able to go back to the past while yet retaining the knowledge of a future unforgotten.  Within the possibility of that paradigm, could the future be altered, or does the past that one thinks one is going back to already account for the presence of the person who goes back, and thus does the future remain within the rigidity of the unchanged past impervious to the arrogant thought that the future could be modified by the mere presence of one who goes back to the future thinking that the future could be changed?

The concept itself is a unique twist upon the creativity of human thought — not of time-travel into the future, but where the future as “now” is taken into the past, but with the retention of the “now” taken with us, thus becoming no longer a “now” but a future knowledge merely because one goes back into the past.

From whence does such an idea originate?  Is it our yearnings that begin to percolate in old age, when regrets seep beyond the borders of mere wistful thoughts and find their tug-and-pull upon our consciences?  Is it to try and make up for all the stupidity that has prevailed in the bumpy road of growing up, where mistakes made were forced upon family and friends who had the compassion and empathy to carry us through our troubled times?  Do regrets uncorrected plague our later years more than when youth betrayed the lack of character shown so brazenly when weeping mothers and shuddering fathers kept their silence during those terrible years of want and waste?

To go back to the future is but a yearning to correct mistakes left in forlorn corners of regretful memories, and for Federal and Postal employees who suffer from a medical condition such that the medical condition is beginning to prevent the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, the time is “now” to begin to prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Going back to the future is not an option; the medical condition is with us now, and it is precisely the “now” which must be dealt with in order to prepare for an uncertain future.

Certainly, it would be nice to “go back” — back before our careers were impacted; back before the medical condition became chronic and intractable; and back before this mess called “life’s trials” began to prevent us from performing the essential elements of our jobs.  But it is only in the movies where the past can be corrected; in reality, going back to the future means that we must now proceed with caution to correct the mistakes and malfunctions of life in the context of today’s reality, and not yesterday’s regrets.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire 
Federal Disability Retirement Attorney

 

Federal & Postal Disability Retirement from OPM: Ruminations on the past

Whether one does X is often of little significance; “Why” it is done, and to what extent, is quite another matter.  The past – whether of long ago, beyond the time of memory holding presently or of history being read about, or the past of one’s own kept in sequestered moments of reflective thought and in photographs carefully guarded and encased within a protective album of shelved remembrances – is a time behind; the future, an angst-filled uncertainty few of us look forward to.

It is the present, and how we treat it, spend it, work it and waist it away or labor furiously to appear “productive” about; and then, there are ruminations on the past.

That is where the “why” and the constant obsessions begin to overwhelm – of what we could have done differently, where we “went wrong” and what lessons can be gleaned for today.  Ruminating on the past is a favorite pastime for many; but when it begins to destroy the future by robbing from the present, it is time to set aside such wasted efforts and begin to focus more upon one’s current situation in order to prepare for the future.

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, the time to set aside ruminations on the past is “now”.

Preparing a Federal Disability Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, takes up a significant amount of time, effort and required focus upon gathering the necessary information, presenting the compelling facts and establishing the legal nexus between the medical conditions and the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal position.

In doing so, ruminations on the past need to be suspended; angst-ridden obsessions about the future will need to be ignored; and only the “present” focus will become the necessary standard.  Ruminations on the past can come about sometime in the future; it is the present concern about past events that will be significant in securing one’s future by preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire