Federal Employee Medical Retirement: The Human Narrative

Ultimately, of course, a Federal Disability Retirement application under either FERS or CSRS is based upon a “human narrative” — delineating, describing and revealing (sorry — I could not think of an appropriate third word in this attempted alliteration which begins with the letter “d”) an individual’s story of one’s medical condition, the impact upon such condition upon one’s ability/inability to perform the essential elements of one’s job, and the further impact upon one’s routine of daily living (yes, we tend to forget that third part on SF 3112A, which asks about how one’s medical condition impacts other aspects of one’s life).  

Is it a story which “touches” someone at the Office of Personnel Management?  If one reads enough of the denial letters from the Office of Personnel Management (and only an attorney who handles such cases would have access to denial letters other than the one which is addressed to a particular applicant), one begins to realize that the Case Worker at the Office of Personnel Management is merely applying a set of legal criteria in a mechanical, almost assembly-line like manner.  

There is very little humanity involved in the review and determination by the Office of Personnel Management.  Now, one may argue that there could not be “another way” of making a determination — for, to show human emotion, compassion, sympathy or empathy would be contrary to the mandate of “the law”, and that is probably true.  One hopes, however, that the human narrative which is described in the Applicant’s Statement of Disability touches — in some way — such that it triggers a determination of approval based upon the law.  This, because if it is merely “the law” which is applied by OPM, then that implies that one must “know the law”; and knowledge of the law is rarely shown, and even more rarely applied, by the Office of Personnel Management.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

OPM Disability Retirement: How Specific?

The Applicant’s Statement of Disability should be specifically tailored to encompass and embrace the particular type of medical condition, the unique symptoms which result from the specific medical condition, a factual delineation of the type of daily, essential elements of the particular type of job one engages in, and the impact of each to all.  The “creativity” of writing comes into play, not in terms of “storytelling creativity” (although the applicant’s statement must always have an element of storytelling), but rather a compelling description of the “human story”  — the story of the individual who is suffering from the particular medical condition, combined with the workplace impact and peppered with the emotional toll of the human condition.  It should never be voluminous — for length should never replace a concise story; it should never be a stream of consciousness — for the human story should always be factual and reasoned; and it should never be a ranting bundle of emotionalism — for the true story of a medical condition upon a human life should entail a medical delineation, along with a detached, but personal, account of the person’s statement of impact.  Such a balanced story needs to be told well, and it needs to be compelling.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

CSRS & FERS Disability Retirement: Creativity & Objectivity

The Applicant’s Statement of Disability is a very personal statement; that is precisely why when I take on cases at the Second (Reconsideration) Stage, or at the Third (Merit Systems Protection Board) Stage, I have an opportunity to read heart-felt, personal, and very “emotional” statements written by the individual applicant.  This is not to be negatively critical of such statements — such personal, emotionally-charged statements can be very effective.  On the other hand, it is precisely because the Applicant who writes such a statement — about his or her own personal engagement and experience of the disability — that he or she is unable to provide an objective perspective.  It is very difficult to “stand outside” of one’s self and write about one’s self.  Again, this is not a negative criticism — it is simply what it is.  As an aside, I have had many of my clients who read my interpretive statement of disability, which I craft based upon multiple sources (i.e., by speaking to the client; by having my client fill out a short questionnaire; by reading the medical reports and records, etc.), who tell me later that, yes, the statement of disability accurately reflected their state of medical disability, and further, that it made him or her realize for the first time how “bad off” they were.  It takes a perspective of objectivity to creatively — and accurately — depict one’s own medical disability and the impact of such disability upon one’s life.  For this, a third party — often an attorney — is needed.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire