FERS Disability Application Assistance: Intermediate causes

Reading Aristotle, we realize that most of us search for the “final” cause of things, quickly overlooking and ignoring those intermediate causes that make for the engines that transport, the accomplishments that matter, and sustain the requisite constancy of life.

It is like the individual on the team who takes credit for the completion of a project; yes, he gives some acknowledgment to various contributors by giving lip-service with the traditional, “And I would like to thank Mitch, Susan and Bill for being instrumental in our endeavor”, but in the end, it is the “finalist” in every causal conclusion that everyone recognizes and applauds.

Yet, it is the intermediate, sometime imperceptible causes which make for the foundation of a life’s work.  We always want to know what the final outcome is, and when we have predetermined the conclusion, we quickly lose interest and move on.

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, it is important to realize that this “stage of life” is merely an intermediate cause, and not the final conclusion.

There is “life after Federal or Postal employment,” and preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application and surviving the complex administrative process is not the final chapter in this enduring story for those Federal employees who suffer from a medical condition and have no choice but to prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, whether you are under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset.

The “final chapter” is yet to be written, just as the “final cause” is still to be encountered; this is, after all, merely one of those Aristotelian intermediate causes.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Lawyer Representation for OPM Disability Claims: The price paid

That is the question, isn’t it?  In this monetary-based system of thought, we always ask that one, and the follow-up:  What was the price paid, and was it worth it? Are the two questions and issues divisible, or are they inseparably linked like Siamese twins sharing a vital organ?

As to the first, the question can encompass an entanglement of intricate complexities that flow from the second — when, in fact, it is a simple question requiring merely a fundamental answer.  We ask first, What is the price paid?

We begin to hem and haw and hesitate:  Well, it was really beautiful and I’ve always wanted it and it was worth it because it brought back the warmth of childhood memories and….  Once such explanations and justifying delineations occur, you have conflated the second issue into the first; for, the first requires a simple and straightforward answer:  the dollar-amount; a monetarily-objective response; a unit from a designated numerical set, etc.  Thus: “I bought X”.  “How much did you pay for it?”  “It was priced at X-dollars, and I purchased it for Y-amount”.

Then, the inevitable follow-up:  “Was it worth it?”  It is this second question that evokes a conflation with the first; for, such a query is not so simple inasmuch as it involves psychology, emotion, rational and irrational underpinnings, and the subjective encompassment of often-unexplainable attachments.

The worth of a thing may not parallel the price of it; for, what what paid for it can spread throughout a spectrum of differentiating circumstances:  Perhaps one got a bargain; maybe the seller didn’t realize the true market value and vastly underpriced it; or, it may be that a person needed to do a “quick sale” because he needed the cash, and was willing to part with it at a basement-bargain price, etc.

Take the following hypothetical:  At an auction, a painting is bid upon.  It is a rather unassuming piece that depicts a woman, fully clothed, with a slight smile.  It is not an exceptional painting, and is expected to be auctioned off for about a thousand dollars.  The bidding begins, and very quickly, it becomes clear that primarily 2 individuals are vying for the painting — one, a very wealthy individual; the other, a middle-class bloke barely able to meet his monthly debts.  The bidding exceeds the expected price to be gained by the auctioneer, which makes him happy beyond description.

This is the cake that dreams are made of for the auction house that expects very little:  Two or more individuals who are willing to pay a price exceeding the monetary worth of the item.  After a series of back-and-forth bids, the middle-class bloke wins the bid — at $20,000.00.  When later asked about it, he replies: “The painting reminds me of my mother.”  Bankrupt and considered a fool by everyone in the neighborhood, he nevertheless feels for the rest of his life that it “was worth it”.

Now, turn the hypothetical around and let’s say that the wealthy man won the bidding.  When asked about it, he simply stated: “Oh, I was just bored.  I plan on trashing the painting when I get home, but it was exciting to just rob someone else of his desire and pleasure.”  In either case, was the price paid “worth” it?

That is the question that Federal and Postal workers have to answer when determining whether or not to file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset — the price of one’s health; whether it is worth continuing in a job or career that persists upon a track to demoralize, deteriorate and destroy one’s health; or, whether a reduced income at the price of being able to focus upon one’s health may be “worth” it.

Preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through OPM itself has a price — of the long wait, the complex administrative process and the stress of waiting; but like the painting being bid upon at the auction house, it is always the balancing of the price paid and the worth of the gain that must be considered when preparing, formulating and filing for OPM Disability Retirement benefits.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Attorney for Federal Disability Retirement claims: Impediments

There is always something in the way, isn’t there?  That’s one of life’s paramount rules, a presumptive nuisance, an annoyance that hinders and obstructs.  It is one of those “laws” that we all laugh about, whether Murphy’s or some uncle who visits and has the talent to always put a damper on things; or maybe it is just a trite truism of life that cannot ever be avoided.

You can come up with the greatest idea in the universe, and best of dreams that are about to come true — and then the “it” comes upon the scene.  Impediments represent the spoiler that dampens the soul, treads upon the glory of an anticipated morning’s future, and follows us with the proverbial dark clouds or like pig-pen’s constant swirl of dirt and grime.

You excitedly share your dreams and hopes, speaking quickly and with urgency of youth, enthusiasm or an admixture of both; and you get the tepid response of, “Aw, it’ll never work.”  Or, you believe you have uncovered the key to life’s success, come running home — to parents who have endured a lifetime of disappointments or to a spouse who has just been taking care of 3 boisterous children — open the door with a stupid smile, start to relate your great insight, and you are told: “Great. Now, will you please take out the garbage?”

Impediments are the lifeline to reality’s check upon our own foolhardiness; or, for the eternal optimist, they reflect the greater challenge that tests our skills in gauging our sincerity, endurance, integrity and reliability.

Medical conditions constitute such an impediment.  We take such things as health and the daily ability to get up in the morning, take a shower and go to work — those ordinary things in life that we all presume everyone the world over does in a similar fashion — for granted.  But then that horrid and feared “medical condition” creeps up on us, and suddenly we cannot do those things we once never even thought about, and it is that impediment that begins to gnaw away at one’s soul.

For the Federal employee or U.S. Postal worker who has experienced not only the impediment of the medical condition itself, but the greater hindrance from the manner in which the Federal agency or the U.S. Postal Service has begun in their campaign of harassment and intimidation, preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is often the best pathway around the impediment.

No, it may not be a brilliant idea, and nor even a greater insight than what the ordinary ho-hum person may come up with when confronted with the same or similar situation.  But maybe it was never meant to be — and that those brilliant ideas can come about after the approval received from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, when the Federal or Postal employee has less worries about one’s future, and then you can expend your energies coming up with ideas to save the planet, become the next Einstein, or just plainly have the time to take out the garbage.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Disability Retirement: Mood, weather, medical conditions

The Age of Science is upon us.  No longer do we believe that the moon is a god in the orb of heavenly spheres; that incantations will solve problems of health or bad vibes; and one’s mood is not a matter of environment or upbringing, but can be resolved with a pill or an electric shock wave.

The weather is confined to discussions about carbon emissions and global warming by man-made intransigence, and never about gods controlling the destiny of ill-temper because they became angry with an individual; and medical conditions cannot be exorcised by mere religious fervor, anymore, and to do so when a child is involved may end one up in jail for abuse and neglect.  One’s mood can still be influenced by one’s upbringing; the weather can sometimes impact moods, dog’s howling and animals acting skittishly; and medical conditions – well, they have became the sole province of science.

There is no room left for hobbits, goblins or fairytales left to the imagination; perhaps that is what is deemed “progress” and the expunging of antiquated horrors.  One need only to review the medical procedures of yesteryear to thank whoever for the advances made in modernity – of painful procedures and implements now banished; of even simple theories that used “blood-letting” in order to balance the humors that went out of kilter.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who – regardless of what “science” says about mood, weather and medical conditions – have been impacted by all three: one’s mood still seems impacted by the weather on various days; and the weather seems to exacerbate medical conditions, whether psychological or physical; and in a cycle of effects, the medical conditions seem to impact upon one’s moods, it never seems to be the whole solution that the surgical knife or the doctor’s pill resolves everything.  Somehow, there always is a suspicion that there is “more to it”.

Looking at filing a Federal Disability Retirement is somewhat like the interaction between mood, weather and medical conditions; it is not the “only” or even the “ultimate” solution to life’s problems, but is merely a vehicle and component in a complex set of life’s “issues” that may need to be accessed.  In order to do that, it is necessary to prepare, formulate and file an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, and it may well be that such a filing is ultimately impacted or influenced by one’s mood, the weather and certainly the extent of one’s medical condition and one’s inability to perform all of the essential elements of one’s job. Go figure.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

OPM Medical Retirement under FERS & CSRS: Admission

It is a noun of peculiar variability, perhaps all interconnected upon reflection.  It can refer to the permission to enter, whether by right, payment or removal of obstacles; or, denoting the price of such entrance; or even yet, a confession or acknowledgment of a point taken; and in other contexts, of being accepted into a fraternity of sorts, as in “admission to a university” or “to the legal bar” – meaning, not an actual, physical movement through gates now open, but a conceptual membership into a community of selective individuals.

Is there a linguistic relationship between that sequestered sense of the word – of an acknowledgment or confession – in contradistinction to the other forms, all of the remainder of which encompasses an entrance, movement or acceptance to a desired destination upon the removal of an obstruction, whether by a physical gate or a nod of consent?

How about this:  An admission denoting a confessional standard or conceding a point of conflict can be likened as a release, where pent-up resistance is suddenly or finally torn down, and the voluntary pouring out of one’s previously-withheld desire to “tell all” has been replaced with the emptying sensation of a satisfied conscience.  You are now allowed into the community of guiltless souls, or at least of having the feeling of being released from the cage of deception in falsehood.

Admission in this sense is a freeing of one’s inner soul, and it is normally insufficient to bring that narrative of expiation in a silent soliloquy to one’s self; thus, there are confessionals and penitent individuals, bowing with genuflective subservience and unmasking one’s soul to someone cloaked in authoritative garments, and somehow the externalization of one’s guilty conscience has an antiseptic, cleansing effect.

Admission into a fraternity of brotherhood is always a welcoming act; admission of one’s mistakes, wrongs committed and sins adorned, has never been an easy undertaking, and less so in this day and age where moral equivalency is the prevailing rule of life.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering filing a Federal Disability Retirement application through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, the issue of admission is always twofold:  First, the entire purpose of preparing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application is to gain admission into the class of former Federal and Postal employees who are now Federal Disability Retirement annuitants; and, secondly, it is important to allow for the difficult admission that the entire administrative and bureaucratic process is a complicated one, and therefore may require the assistance of legal counsel in order to successfully maneuver one’s way through the maze of complexities.

An admission in the first sense is thus the goal; an admission in the latter sense is merely a reflection of wisdom in progress for the Federal or Postal employee who, by necessity of a medical condition, needs to file a Federal Disability Retirement application with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Federal and Postal Disability Retirement: Persuasive Impact

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 important not to confuse the difference between that which is central in proving one’s Federal Disability Retirement application, from that which is merely of persuasive import.

In some cases, there may be a necessity, for very pragmatic reasons, to deliberately switch the two; but as a general rule, the argument for persuasive documentation should be used as secondary sources of proof.

Often, the choices are limited for the Federal or Postal employee:  either one continues to work at a job where it is clear that performance, attendance, or capability to continue is steadily and progressively deteriorating; or one can simply quit and walk away from the Federal or Postal job without doing anything (not an advisable option); or, one can file for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.  That being said, if the Federal or Postal employee takes the third option of Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, then one must necessarily prove one’s case.

In order to prove one’s case, one must have a supportive doctor.

While VA ratings, OWCP Second Opinion doctors’ reports, etc., constitute examples of evidence which may be persuasive, the centrality of one’s case is represented by a narrative report from one’s own treating doctor.  In some cases, when one’s own doctor will not support such a case, one may use the persuasive evidence as the key to proving one’s case, but as a general rule, they should remain as collateral sources of proof.

Remember that “what” is used is important, but sometimes, “how” it is used can be just as important, if not more so.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

FERS & CSRS Federal Disability Retirement: Beyond mere contrivances

We learn at an early age to create a world of make-believe; of knights and princesses extracted not from the dungeons of the feudal world steeped in hunger, mass epidemic deaths and living conditions unfit even for the rats which lived and traveled freely in the underbelly of wealthy kings and courtesans, but from the literary imaginations of later dreamers.  Or of happiness couched in syllables of uncertain saliency, where we talk ourselves into believing that fairness is inherent in games of chance, that speeches make for belief, and what people do behind closed doors are for the privacy of minds and mindless chatter, not for public consumption before the vote is cast.

To be “real” is to open one’s self to the gates of hell; and in a society which relishes artificiality and antiseptic appearances where we are willing to poison ourselves in order to attain the pristine color of chemical green in the August wilt of lawns thirsting for a drop of rain, how can we expect empathy when we have all throughout our lives stamped out the reality of suffering which would foster such emotions?  Thus do we have to live, in the very bed which we have made.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition necessitates preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, it is all the more difficult to face the reality and to go beyond the mere contrivances of life.

Medical conditions have a way of slapping one squarely in the face of reality; it cannot be concealed, nor hidden behind the smiling face of genteel “hellos” and “how are you” artifices; the eyes tell all, and the hurting condemnation wrought by limps, squints and trembling hands, cannot but tell the story of impending doom.

How does the Federal agency or the U.S. Postal Service react in such situations?  Did the pristine lawn and ego of a prior promotion help to foster the feelings of care, concern and community of thought?

From birth to death, the life of contrivances has taught us well, and the reaping of that harvest of cold-heartedness reveals the underbelly of who we are.  And so, what is to be done?  For the Federal and Postal worker,  to prepare an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, in order to attain a level of security so one can move beyond the mere contrivances, and then to determine the next steps to regain a level of humanity perhaps lost and never to be returned, but at the very least, to try, and again, to try.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire