FERS Disability Retirement: Of Grief

Chekhov was a medical doctor and knew about death, human suffering and the plight of spectrums involving emotional turmoil.  His profession as a doctor resulted in encounters with human suffering; his love for writing often reflected the experiences gained from his medical profession.

He possessed a profound comprehension of grief, and his short story, simply named, “Grief”, conveys the two-tiered phenomena involving that very fundamental human emotion: The feeling or sense of grief, to begin with; but further, the need for the grieving person to tell his or her story fully, and in so doing, coming to terms with the loss which is the basis of grief.

Every loss, to a greater or lesser degree, results in some sense of grief, and death is not the only basis of that most brutal of emotions.

For Federal Government employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition such that the health condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, part of the grief felt is the loss of one’s career, of a diminishment of finances, of reduced circumstances and the severing of that collegial sense of working at an agency.

Filing a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management can be a difficult choice. To do it effectively and properly, contact a FERS Disability Lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and allow that emotional turmoil of grief be somewhat blunted by having an experienced advocate do much of the groundwork on your behalf.

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 Benefits: What I Missed

Often, it is now known until it is too late.  “What I missed”, or failed to do, or did too much of — said too much, gave too much information, etc., all comes under the general headline of, What I missed.  Of course, in some disciplines, that “missing piece” could be critical — as in a missing bolt or structural beam in building a house, a building, a highway overpass, etc.

In Administrative Law, as in preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, “what I missed” could result in a denial of one’s Federal Disability Retirement application with OPM.

Fortunately, there are additional opportunities to correct what I missed, both at the Reconsideration stage of the process and, if necessary, before an Administrative Law Judge at the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board.

“What I missed” can often be prevented by having a lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, but even then, just understand that while most mistakes are correctible, the one mistake that is difficult to repair is to put blinders on OPM once they have seen something.

Contact a disability lawyer who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law, and preempt that agonizing feeling that occurs when you submit a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS with OPM on the uneasy feeling of “What I Missed”.

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.

 

Federal Disability Retirement: The historical data

How much historical data is too much?  Is there a correlation between “too much” and “loss of interest”? In other words, when a history book is written, does the interest shown by the reader begin to wane when a certain point of quantitative overload begins to overwhelm?  Further, does the audience for whom the historical data is written depend upon the extent given?

Certainly, “popular” historical narratives provide “juicier” content than more “serious” biographies, where the salacious aspects of a person’s life or of an event are put to the fore, as opposed to relegating them to footnotes or in those “fine print” pages at the back of the book.

If, for example, data is compiled for an internal study for the “Historical Society of X”, then certain detailed information without limitations might be included — i.e. how many times this or that civilization went to war, went to the bathroom daily, ate one kind of fruit as opposed to another, etc. But if that “study” were to be made into a biography of an indigenous tribe, to be sold to the general public, it might leave out certain of the more uninteresting data, or placed in footnotes or “background notes” at the back of the book.

At what point does a historical narrative become “tedious”?  Again, is there a correlation between “interest shown/sparked/waning/losing” and the extent of data provided?  Is there a “qualitative” difference as opposed to sheer quantitative overload?

These issues are important to keep in mind when a Federal or Postal employee begins to write one’s narrative in response to questions posed on SF 3112A, Applicant’s Statement of Disability.  For, there is always a tendency on the part of the Federal or Postal applicant to have this unquenchable desire to “tell one’s story”, as opposed to answering the question on SF 3112A in as precise, concise and incisive manner.

At times, some amount of historical background may be relevant and somewhat necessary, but unlike “internal studies” that have no cognizable consequences in providing “too much” information, an overabundance of irrelevant data provided may have a duality of negative results: First, it may take away from, and diminish, the “main point” of the narrative, and Second, you may be providing information that is inadvertently harmful to one’s OPM Disability Retirement case without intending to.

Remember always in a Federal Disability Retirement case, that the eyes that once see cannot be blinded after the fact, and it is better to provide information as a supplemental means in a Federal Disability Retirement case, than to have to explain, correct and amend after a denial is received from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS Disability Retirement: The world of faded photos

There is an anomaly contained in the attempt to “save” faded photos; it is an oxymoron of sorts, where modernity erases the backwardness of yesterday, and yet, at the same time, wants to preserve it.

We have all heard about companies that exist which “preserve” outdated family movies, photographs and taped recordings of distant times; it is all placed, preserved, edited and presented in a convenient “thumb drive” or in some “cloud” in the ethereal universe of a web-based phenomena.  That faded photograph, beautiful in its brown crispiness of an elderly man or woman who looks serious, because in those days having one’s image preserved for posterity was a serious undertaking — in contrast to today’s selfies immediately downloaded and uploaded into a social medium that is quickly disseminated to countries worldwide in an instant, displaying a foolishness that would shock a generation or two of those removed from such technological “advancements”.

The world of faded photos is an universe of past histories now forgotten, frozen in time by a captured expression depicting a time before, now replaced by a time after, and forever remaining in the memories of those who have survived but now sit quietly in nursing homes of corners relegated to mere existence in darkening folds of dementia and antiseptic coils of plastic tubing extending lives beyond what the photographs themselves intended to display.

The world of faded photos defy the modern attempt to preserve that which was meant to last for a generation only, just as men and women try in futility to ignore mortality by cosmetic corrections that makes for appearances which procrastinate the inevitability of time’s ravages.

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, whether under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the world of faded photos is the one that you remember “before” the onset of the medical condition, and instead of attempting to “preserve” the photograph, it is best to recognize that the image you see in the mirror today is the one worth protecting, and not the faded daguerreotype of yesterday, and the best way to do that is to prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement so that you can secure some semblance of your future, and not be frozen in the timelessness of the world of faded photos.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill
OPM Disability Attorney

 

Federal Employee Disability Information: Accuracy

How important is accuracy?  The converse of such a query, of course, is:  Is inaccuracy significant?  One would immediately posit:  It all depends.

Take the following 2 hypotheticals:  An archeological dig is conducted, and it is believed that the site of the ruins is of relevant importance concerning a time-period of “recent” history — say, during the American Revolution.  Given that scenario, the “dating” of the site should be ascertainable within a year succeeding or preceding, such that if the Lead Archaeologist declares that the event in question occurred in 1778, “or possibly in 1779, maybe as early as 1777”, we know that — given the time period in question (1775 – 1783) — such a statement conveys a fairly accurate historical context.

Now, take the same hypothetical, but this time [sic] concerning some form [again, sic] of a fossil that is deemed at least 500 million years old.  If the Lead Archaeologist declares with some hint of irony, “Give or take a few million years more or less” — what would our reaction be?  Is such a “find” just as accurate as in the first hypothetical?  Can a declaration that is numerically off by a few million years (i.e., looking at it in quantifiable terms of 24 hours in a day times 365 days in a year times 2 – 5 million years equals how many hours for those who want a graspable perspective) be called a “science” in any meaningful usage of the term?

Of course, one could argue that even within the first hypothetical, given the limited range of years that comprises the American Revolution (1775 – 1783, or a mere 8 years), to be off by a year or so is also quite an astoundingly inaccurate assessment.  But which is “more accurate” — the one that is estimated within a year, or the one that quantifies it in terms of “millions” of years?  Can one even ask the question of “more or less” accurate, when the very concept of accuracy itself denotes precision and pinpointed, undeviated marksmanship?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the question of “accuracy” can be a crucial one.  How “accurate” does one’s Statement of Disability need to be on Standard Form 3112A, Applicant’s Statement of Disability?  What “precisely” does the treating doctor have to include in the medical report?  How detailed (and therefore, accurately) does the nexus between the medical documentation and the Applicant’s Statement of Disability does it have to reflect?

In all such questions, “accuracy” is a goal to attain in preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be submitted to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

For, while the Archaeologist may be “off” by a quantifiable sum of years in a site-dig and suffer little to no consequences, the Federal Disability Retirement applicant must depend upon the accuracy of the law in determining benefits to secure a future yet uncertain, and such an administrative endeavor is likened more to the accuracy of the arrow that is shot towards an apple resting upon the head of a young boy, than of a declaration made that is off by a few million years, give or take, more or less.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Disability Retirement: Affirmative Steps

Procrastination is the bane of progress; by delaying and kicking the proverbial can down the road, the chances of decreasing one’s odds of accomplishment become magnified exponentially.  What is the reasoning behind inaction and inertia?

Human life must by necessity involve movement and progress; for, unlike other species who find the immediacy of satisfaction and gratification to be the basis of existential justification, we bring to the fore the coalescence of one’s memory of where we came from; a future hope of where we want to go; and in combing the two, a greater purpose of teleological rationality within the context of the here and now.  But that which provides the foundation of uniqueness, can conversely be the lynchpin of destruction.

Self-justifying language games of self-immolation; we can construct strings of logically valid reasonings based upon convoluted cacophonies of orchestrated mutterings.  But that which appears reasonable is not always valid; and as validity constitutes the systemic structure of logic, so that which may reveal itself as sound uttering may merely be a whining whisper of a mad man’s meanderings.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who can no longer perform all of the essential elements of one’s position, the reasons for not filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits are wide, varied, and often complex.  “This job has been my life for so long” (understandable, but change is often an inevitable feature of life); “Maybe my agency can accommodate me” (unlikely); “I am hoping to get better” (yes, but in the meantime, what is your agency planning to do?).

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is a big and dramatic step.  But for the Federal and Postal worker who cannot perform at least one, if not more than one, of the essential elements of one’s positionally-determined duties, it is time to consider taking some affirmative steps in a direction which one often knows to be true, but where procrastination is the path of least resistance.

And, yes, to err is human, but at what cost, and where does human history reveal that delay results in a successful outcome?

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal & Postal Medical Retirement through the OPM: Altered States

When once the tide of change was welcome, where youth allowed for upheavals and malleability; replaced by age, leading to a staid and stable of stability, how repetition constitutes peace, an unadventurous respect for quietude.  But is not inertness the precursor of death?  Altered states and changed circumstances tend to be easily adapted to when one is younger; but as age seeks the sedate, so the vicissitudes of life and what they portend creates a havoc and turmoil of turbulence where the seeking of quietude becomes an end in and of itself.

That is why weekends are guarded with such ferocious aptitudes; and how Mondays invite the blues of depression and despair.  Medical conditions tend to equalize life’s loss of balance; for, as a condition of existence, the debilitating nature they impose, the chronic pain, the loss of mental acuity and disequilibrium of mind, body and soul; suddenly, whether a weekend or a week day, it is a matter of degrees within an altered state of existence.

Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal employee or the U.S. Postal Worker is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is an option which the Federal or Postal employee should seriously consider when once the medical condition begins to prevent the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s positional duties in the Federal or Postal job.

For, it is within the context of a busy and tumultuous life, when the Federal or Postal employee must accept the altered state of existence where a medical condition begins to disrupt the continuity of productivity; the altered state itself must be changed; and the change is often the need to leave the Federal workforce, but with an income and annuity sufficient to provide a stable economic circumstance, and where health insurance can be retained for the foreseeable future in order to continue to receive the medical treatment necessary.

Federal OPM Disability Retirement may not be the perfect solution for every complex circumstance, but it is an option which provides for future choices to be left open, for opportunities remaining yet to be met, and for a positive altered state to be embraced where a negation of stability is encountered within the deep chasm of a medical condition which has caused a disequilibrium of life’s unexpected vicissitudes.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Postal & Federal Disability Retirement Benefits: Beyond the Efficacy of Advice

There comes a point where the tripartite intersection between factual urgency, advice, and the receptiveness to such advisory delineations, becomes a futile act of inertia.  Facts are often self-evident to most who seek to view and understand them; advice, based upon the facts as presented, is rarely profound or enlightening, and quite often merely states the obvious, based upon the facts as perceived; but it is the problematic venue of the one to whom advice is given, where negation of due consideration and persistence in intractable stubbornness betrays the efficacy of the first two prefatory components.

The good thing about advice is that it is free; the bad, is that it can be ignored or otherwise shelved into bifurcated compartments of a schizophrenic mindset. The real quandary comes, however, when the tripartite intersection is met with a fourth element, making it into a quadrilateral conundrum:  a state of affairs which actually is self-destructive.  Medical conditions fit into that category.

When medical conditions have a chronic and debilitating aspect, manifesting a progressive deterioration upon the individual through systemic failures and symptoms warning of greater impending trauma upon the body or psyche, and one refuses to acknowledge the signals or otherwise ignores the urgency of telltale signs, then the avoidance of the coalescence of facts, advice and receptiveness to advice goes beyond mere qualitative stubbornness, but becomes a character flaw of ignorance and deliberate dimwittedness.

Whether the medical condition involves physical pain and conditions represented by chronic back or neck pain, degenerative disc disease, shoulder impingement syndrome, internal knee derangement, Crohn’s Disease, Sjogren’s Syndrome, Rotator Cuff injury, or a whole host of other physical conditions; or, perhaps it encapsulates psychiatric conditions of Major Depression, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Panic Disorder, suicidal ideations, Bipolar Disorder, etc. — whatever the medical condition, when the facts speak, the advice reinforces, and receptiveness to the advice is negated through stubbornness or intractable refusal, the time to consider alternative approaches to life must be faced.

For Federal and Postal employees who are under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, eligibility for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management is that option of consideration.  If the medical condition impacts the Federal or Postal employee’s ability to perform all of the essential elements of the Federal or Postal job, then it is time to consider filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits.

If the Federal or Postal employee’s treating doctor has already stated that seeking a different line of work is advisable, but that point of intersection where facts, advice, and receptiveness to such advisory delineations has been ignored, but where the fourth quadrant involving increasing medical manifestation continues to haunt, then it may be time to reconsider, and engage in the most primordial of acts which even the lowest of primates does not ignore:  self-preservation.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire