OPM Disability Retirement: The Fear of Tomorrow

There is, of course, the other statement — of replacing the preposition “of” with “for” — which alters the essence of meaning at its core, and not just in some ancillary manner.  The fear of tomorrow pits our relationship of a being in the present to an uncertainty of a time beyond; whereas, the fear “for” tomorrow magnifies the present in the context of recognized circumstances and current issues that must be analyzed as against a future possibility.

Perhaps the distinction in the prepositional modifier is too subtle to make a difference.  Yet, the first sense of the statement — the fear of tomorrow — places one with an angst as an object-to-object antagonism, much like a person’s fear of spiders or creepy-crawlies, where there is no cure for such a response.  The other form — of a fear for tomorrow — allows for rational discourse and a “talking about” not only tomorrow, but of the fear itself, their underlying reasons and the potential solutions to objectives not yet met.

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 fear of tomorrow must by necessity be replaced with a fear for tomorrow, and that is when the next step can be taken: Preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Do not let the fear of tomorrow stop you from asserting your employment rights and eligibility for a benefit that is offered; instead, determine the underlying basis of the fear for tomorrow and begin to take the necessary steps to assert your legal rights by consulting with an Attorney who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement Law.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement: Inconsistencies

Selective extrapolation is the preferred method by which they justify a denial; a notation taken out of context from this particular day, or an offhand comment in response to a nurse’s question on a differentiated day where you may be feeling slightly better, etc.

Inconsistencies remain the harbinger of a denial of a FERS Medical Retirement application from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.  Yet, life is full of inconsistencies, and one can even argue that inconsistencies are the stamp of reality — that sincerity of life’s events are replete with contradictions and spectrums of bumps; that perfection is often a greater indication of artifice, instead of life’s reality that is actually lived.

That is the anomaly and the inconsistency itself: Perfection of circumstances is the real artifice; lack of perfection, the reality of living life.  Yet, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management reviews a Federal Disability Retirement application in the very opposite way; they search out the inconsistencies, then allege that those inconsistencies somehow rise to the level of artifice, when all along they merely reflect the reality of life itself, replete with inconsistencies that betray the lack of perfection which truth itself brings.

Thus, beware when the doctor or nurse writes in a note, “Feeling much better today” — for, although you still hobble about because of a broken body or are unable to focus or concentrate because of a psychiatric condition, the inconsistency between a singular notation and the reality reflected in one’s medical condition is the weaponized methodology of a Federal Agency which seeks out such inconsistencies as a basis for a denial.

As such, a Federal employee or U.S. Postal Service worker who seeks to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits should turn for advice and counsel to an experienced Attorney who specializes in FERS Disability Retirement Law to make sure that the inconsistencies may be minimized in the impact upon a Federal Disability Retirement application.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire