My Zimbio
Top Stories FightFM.com » 2008 » June

Archive for June, 2008

Why Social Security Disability Benefits Are Disappearing

All, Editor Commentary, Education, Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) No Comments »

Why Social Security Benefits Are Disappearing

People with disabilities are already learning first-hand what America’s baby-boomer generation will soon discover for itself; the Social Security system is underfunded, and as a result benefits are quickly disappearing.

The Social Security system was developed during the Roosevelt administration as a response to widespread poverty during the Great Depression. Amended in 1965 to include disability benefits, the Social Security program was specifically developed to help prevent future situations that might create another depression.

Nearly all working Americans pay into the Social Security system, regardless of age. The Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) requires a certain portion of every paycheck to be paid directly to the U.S. government, to be used specifically for the funding of social security programs including Medicare, retirement pension, survivor benefits (pension for a widow or widower), AND disability insurance. These are the taxes that make your paycheck look smaller than you think it should (oh, those taxes). But what are Americans really getting for their money?

Most people are familiar with one aspect of Social Security – retirement funds. Currently, citizens can apply for social security retirement benefits when they turn either 65 or 67, depending on the year they were born. But what if something happens to the primary wage earner in your family before retirement age? Well, workers who become disabled due to an injury or illness are supposed to be eligible to recover some of those taxes in the form of Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits. Unfortunately, Americans with disabilities are discovering that what they are eligible for in theory and what they can actually recover are two very different things.

The reason for the gap between people who should be eligible for benefits and those who are actually able to receive benefits is simple math. The Social Security system used to be fully funded by FICA taxes; the payroll taxes for each year paid for the benefits given out each year. Indeed, there was a surplus of taxes above the needs for each year’s benefits. In order to maintain the system, the government created a Social Security trust fund in which they invested the remainder of the taxes. Eventually, two situations arose which had the effect of depleting the fund.

First, the U.S. government borrowed against the assets in the fund. Borrowing against assets has the automatic effect of devaluing the asset; if you have a house worth $100,000 dollars (lucky you), then you have $100,000 is assets. If you take out a loan worth half the amount of the house, $50,000, then you only have a remaining $50,000 in assets – half what you had without the loan. Though the example is simplified, the same is true of the Social Security trust fund. The government borrowed against the fund to pay for other programs, thus the value in the trust fund began to decrease.

Second, the baby boomer generation reached maturity. In the 1980’s, the government’s financial projections stated that there were so many people in the baby boomer generation (and future generations, as they had their own children) that the Social Security trust fund, already devalued by the borrowing the government had done against it, would not be able to sustain itself by using FICA taxes. In other words, the Social Security system is going bankrupt. There are more people who need benefits than there is money in the system. The system was designed to be a pay-as-you-go system, with each year’s payroll taxes paying for the same year’s benefits. It was not designed to be a financial asset for the U.S. government to borrow against, nor did the original design take into account the exponential growth in the population.

Unfortunately, rather than educate citizens about the system, the government tends to provide hyperbole and half-measures which do more to cover up the problem than they do to solve it. So instead of delivering benefits to everyone who is eligible, the government now finds ways to reduce benefit payouts. The minimum retirement age at which workers can apply for pension benefits is rising. Fewer and fewer people are able to receive medical benefits, such as Medicare or disability insurance, even though they paid into the system as FICA required.

Rather than explain to applicants why benefits are being denied, the government takes advantage of our nation’s premium on values such as independence and strong work ethics, and blames individuals for not “deserving” benefits, ostensibly because they are not trying hard enough to earn money or live independently. If you were born after 1937, you do not “deserve” pension benefits at age 65 (and the age will continue to be raised). If you are not dying in the courtroom (sometimes even if you are), you do not “deserve” disability benefits. If you are denied disability under SSDI, you do not “deserve” Medicare benefits. The result is that American citizens, citizens who have worked and paid into the Social Security system, are being denied Social Security benefits left and right. Our most vulnerable citizens, those in poverty, the elderly, the disabled, children, the unemployed or under-employed, are being left to fend for themselves, while the government fosters the myth that denials are a result of applicant fraud - not federal fund mismanagement. But the fact is that even according to the Social Security Administration’s public reports, only about 12% of SSDI benefits are terminated due to lack of medical need; the remaining terminations are due to legal technicalities. The problem does not lie with the applicants, who are fully occupied with meeting basic survival needs. The problem lies in the government’s misuse of the system. Privatization, although it may become necessary, will not fix this system. Just as we currently have a private medical system and our most vulnerable citizens lack heath care, a private social security system will leave these (and more) citizens vulnerable to abject poverty, along with all the associated societal ills.

To learn more about the problems facing the Social Security system and what you can do to change it, go to socialsecurityreform.org

The Truth About The Social Security Disablity Process

Education No Comments »

1) Introduction

The United States is a country which rests on a foundation of ideals. At the core of the nation’s foundation are very specific ideals such as freedom, independence, and morality. The government’s domestic policies are supposedly based on and designed to support such ideals. Unfortunately, what policies are designed to accomplish and what they actually accomplish are sometimes vastly different.

Americans regard themselves as a moral society. Part of this sense of morality is derived from the belief that our government assists in the care of those who are unable to care for themselves, including children, the elderly, and the disabled. But do our policies, which are funded directly by our taxes, really accomplish their goals? In the case of Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI), the answer is a profound and categorical “No.”

2) History : What is Social Security Disability Insurance?

The Social Security Act of 1935 was originally written by President Roosevelt as part of his administration’s economic response to the Great Depression. As part of their plan to prevent another depression in the U.S., the plan included the use of payroll taxes to provide a kind of social insurance, providing citizens who found themselves unable to provide for their basic needs with a small source of income. In 1956, the Social Security program was deemed inadequate to respond to the needs of U.S. citizens, and congress added Disability benefits to the program.

Disability and other Social Security benefits, such as retirement income, are fully paid for by automatic payroll taxes. As anyone who has ever earned a U.S. paycheck knows, working citizens who earn a wage are required to submit a certain amount of their income to the U.S. government. A certain portion of those taxes go directly to providing Social Security benefits, including Disability benefits. The program, known as Social Security Disability Insurance, is designed to prevent workers who become medically disabled from falling into poverty. Workers are not able to “opt out” of the SSDI program; in other words, workers cannot refuse to pay that portion of their payroll taxes in return for waiving the disability insurance. Theoretically, all American workers who have paid enough into the Social Security system are enrolled in the SSDI program automatically, and are therefore covered in the event that they should become disabled.

3) SSDI Today: Theory versus Reality

As covered in the previous section, in theory all American workers who pay taxes are automatically insured against losing all income if they become disabled by Social Security Disability Insurance, an automatic deduction from every paycheck.

However, the reality of SSDI today is far removed from the theory behind its inception. Although all American workers who pay taxes pay into the SSDI system, many workers who become medically disabled find it nearly impossible to receive the benefits to which they are entitled. Citizens who have not worked, or have not paid taxes, are automatically disqualified from the program. Unfortunately, and often tragically, most workers who HAVE paid into the program and subsequently become disabled are also unable to receive benefits. Wherever those automatic taxes coming out of payroll checks are going, they do not seem to be going to the Social Security Disability Insurance program as advertised.

In theory, anyone who has become disabled after working and cannot maintain a 40-hour work week due to a medical disability is supposed to be eligible for Social Security Disability benefits. However, the reality is that most people who file for such benefits are denied, even if they meet the established criteria.

4) Why Receiving SSDI Benefits Is Difficult or Impossible

The current SSDI system is not a system of inclusion; it is full of obstacles and barriers which are designed to weed as many people as possible out of the disability system. If these obstacles were only to serve to prevent fraud, they would be understandable. The sad fact, however, is that they generally serve the greater purpose of providing benefits to as few applicants as possible. With the social security system somehow going bankrupt, the government is invested in denying benefits to as many people as it can.

Here are just some of the ways the system works against the disabled:

· Waiting periods – The process of submitting a claim for SSDI takes most people several years at minimum. In fact, a claim cannot even be submitted until the disabled person has been so ill or injured as to be unable to work for a minimum of one year – that means the earliest anyone ever sees a dime is nearly a year and a half… and to be honest, I’ve never personally known anyone to get approved that quickly. Many claims continue into multiple years – as many as 8 or more.

· No really, the waiting periods – Most claims admitted for SSDI (approximately 75%) are denied the first time through. No questions, no debates, denied the first time as a matter of (unofficial) policy. This occurs for two reasons. First, a large number of people will not have the knowledge or capacity to fight the denial, and will drop the claim all together. The second, and more insidious reason for the waiting periods, is that many claimants will die while their claim is in process, and therefore the claim will never have to be paid. This tells you what disabled claimants are truly up against. If they survive and persist, they can request a court hearing to challenge the denial. This process takes a minimum of another year, more likely up to two years depending on the region. When the court date finally arrives the claimant’s chances of approval vary greatly depending on which judge hears the case. While some judges seem reasonable, even compassionate, most do not; they are simply looking for any excuse to deny the claim. And with a stack of paperwork inches thick and years of history, they can usually find one reason, however small, which is all they need. Then the claimant can appeal the decision. This process has NO time limit. The appellate court can hold the claim in limbo for as many years as they see fit. Most claims take upwards of 3 – 5 years to reach a final decision, sometimes many more, regardless of how ill the claimant may be. (Remember that these claimants are experiencing debilitating illness or injuries the whole time – but they are supposed to stick with the red tape and claim process for YEARS on end, with no assistance whatsoever during the process). The sad fact is, most claimants cannot stick with the process, so most claims never have to be paid.

· Paperwork – The average amount of paperwork which a disabled person is required to fill out in order to process a claim (which can take up to five or more years) is so outrageous as to effectively exclude anyone who cannot routinely understand, organize, keep track of, and fill out multiple versions of governmental forms, which are in no way simplified for the disabled population. A typical disability file can be the thickness of an unedited dictionary. Keeping up with the file is the equivalent of a part-time job…and if the claimants could do that, they wouldn’t be applying in the first place.

· Due dates – People hoping to claim disability benefits must not only keep track of all the paperwork, but must be sure not to turn in any paperwork later than the date requested by the SSDI system. Any late paperwork is grounds for a denial. This includes paperwork from doctors, who are often too busy to complete one patient’s paperwork by the requested date. Due dates are also set for visits to caseworkers,phone calls, and SSDI doctor visits (more on that later).

· Transportation - Many people who are disabled face significant transportation barriers. Often they cannot drive themselves, so unless they can arrange and/or pay for transportation to the multiple required doctor and caseworker visits, they are out of luck. Some cities have special transportation programs for the disabled; the catch-22 is that one must already receive disability benefits to qualify. This puts the transportation burden entirely on the disabled person, or friends/family if there are any available to assist. Missing any of the required appointments is grounds for denial.

· Finances – Obviously, becoming disabled wreaks havoc on the wallet. Nevertheless, claimants are personally responsible for all medical costs involving their own doctors, fees for copying paperwork, costs of transportation to required appointments, etc. This is on top of what are often extensive medical fees for diagnosis and treatment.

· Medical care – the SSDI system is entirely financial. It does not in any way assist applicants with obtaining either medical care, or the medical documentation required to “win” a claim, which can also be extensive and expensive. It is in the applicant’s best interest to be under the close, detailed care of physicians and specialists. The less often an applicant is seen by a physician, the less likely the claim will be approved. However, the SSDI system does not acknowledge this bias and provides no assistance for obtaining the medical care and documentation needed to successfully process the claim.

· SSDI doctors – As part of the claim process, many claimants are required to be seen by doctors who work for the SSDI system. Not surprisingly, these doctors will almost always report that the patient is well enough to work. The appointments take about 5 minutes, and are all the SSDI system needs to deny a claim. Although the law states that judges must give the reports of treating physicians (who see the patient regularly and long-term) greater weight, the reality is that this rarely happens. SSDI essentially pays doctors to report that claimants are not disabled enough for benefits.

· Restrictions to activity – Engagement in any work (even occasional or part-time) is grounds for immediate dismissal of any SSDI claim. So despite the fact that a disabled applicant has an extra financial burden with the claim, even occasional work for a family member to help make ends meet can be enough to deny benefits. Although claimants can sometimes bypass this rule with what is known as an RTW, the fact is that any work activity puts applicants at risk for dismissal, and it is the SSDI system, not the applicant, who makes the final decision as to whether the work was acceptable or not. As with work, enrollment in any classes is grounds for dismissal. The result is that people who have lost work due to a disability cannot be re-trained, or take even basic classes (such as a writing or cooking class) to improve their quality of life, or find a potentially suitable occupation or new occasional work. The restrictions apply for the duration of the claim process, and are permanent for any person “fortunate” enough to have his or her claim approved.

· Lawyers can hurt as much as they help - Claimants may choose to have their claims represented by an attorney, but this in no way guarantees that they will be approved. While it is true that disability attorneys sometimes know how to sidestep the pitfalls of the process, they are only allowed to recover a finite amount of money with each claim. This means that the longer the claim goes on, the less percentage the attorney will recover. Disability attorneys are invested in accepting clients whose claims are most likely to be approved “quickly,” longer claims are less likely to be approved and provide financial compensation for the attorneys. The practical implication is that attorneys will actually pay less attention to more complicated claims – claims which most need their assistance.

· Systemic bias – Although the SSDI system does not acknowledge any bias, the reality is that systemic bias against certain categories of patients is a huge factor in the processing of any claim. First is age – it is a matter of formal policy that applicants over age 50 find some weight added to their claims. However, the simple truth is that the younger the claimant, the more difficult to get approved, despite the claimant’s medical condition. This might be fine if illness and injury only affected the elderly, but they do not. Become disabled at a younger age, you’re up a certain creek without a paddle. Also, women with children at home face sever bias in the SSDI system, as there is an unspoken belief that all female applicants with children are somehow going through this suffering and claim process just to afford to stay home. Believe me when I say, there are much easier ways to do that. The insinuation is ridiculous, but it affects applicants nevertheless, and there is nothing they can do about it. Perhaps counter-intuitively, applicants also face stronger bias the better educated they are. There seems to be a belief that people who are more well-educated shouldn’t need disability benefits, even though one has little to do with the other. Ironically (since the system is designed to prevent payouts) the one thing that SSDI does not consider is income. It is not supposed to be a financially based decision; theoretically, anyone fitting the definition of “disabled” should be able to claim benefits despite other income. But the reality is that even patients who have income from family members or elsewhere often find themselves drowning in debt due to the medical bills and other financial burdens resulting from the disability…and sadly, they often take their loved ones down with them. Despite how the system seems to work, disability is not a game, and most of the bankruptcies in the U.S. are caused by a family member’s medical debt. Now you know why.

Read more about the challenges of SSDI claims

FDA Approves Cymbalta For Treatment Of Fibromyalgia

Education, In The News, Pharmaceuticals, Treatment No Comments »

FDA approves Cymbalta to treat neuropathic Fibromyalgia pain

The U.S. Federal Drug Administration (FDA) this week approved the drug duloxetine HCl, sold under the name Cymbalta, for treatment of the widespread pain associated Fibromyalgia (FM).

Cymbalta has been in use as an anti-depressant since the mid-1990’s, but new test results indicate that the drug can also play a role in relieving the type of neuropathic pain commonly experienced by fibromyalgia patients. Cymbalta was originally developed by the Eli Lilly pharmaceutical corporation for use as a selective serotonin and norepinephrine re-uptake inhibitor (SNRI), a class of antidepressants meant to improve upon the previous selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors (SSRI’s) such as Paxil, Prozac, and Zoloft. The drug works on both serotonin and norepinephrine, neurotransmitters known to be involved in both the regulation of moods and the experience of pain. These antidepressants increase the amount of neurotransmitters in the body’s circulation (think of “re-uptake” as recycling; once a neurotransmitter acts on the nerve, it is re-distributed back into the brain for further use rather than being absorbed and broken down by the body). Although SSRI’s are generally thought to produce fewer side effects because they only work on serotonin, some patients respond better to drugs which target both neurotransmitters at once.

Data Highlights

Lilly established the efficacy of Cymbalta in two pivotal three-month clinical trials involving 874 patients with fibromyalgia. In both studies, Cymbalta reduced pain at study endpoint compared with placebo as measured by the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) 24-hour average pain scale.(vi),(vii) The BPI is a scale that measures the severity of pain.

Significant improvement in pain for Cymbalta vs. placebo was observed in the first week of each study. Fifty-one percent and 55 percent of patients on Cymbalta had a 30 percent improvement on the BPI at endpoint (clinically meaningful relief is considered at least 30 percent pain reduction(viii)).

In addition, 65 percent and 66 percent of patients taking Cymbalta 60 mg daily reported feeling better at endpoint as measured by the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I). The PGI-I is a patient-rated scale that evaluates how much improvement has occurred since beginning treatment.

Cymbalta 60 mg was superior to placebo on the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) Total Score. The FIQ is a scale that is used to assess and evaluate the impact of fibromyalgia on aspects of health and functioning believed to be most affected by the disorder.

In four pooled studies, the most commonly observed adverse events in Cymbalta-treated patients with fibromyalgia (greater than or equal to 5 percent and at least twice placebo) were nausea (29 percent), dry mouth (18 percent), constipation (15 percent), decreased appetite (11 percent), sleepiness (11 percent), increased sweating (7 percent) and agitation (6 percent). In the placebo-controlled clinical trials, the overall discontinuation rates due to adverse events for Cymbalta vs. placebo were 20 percent and 12 percent, respectively…

Although Cymbalta has been safely used for years, it has not escaped controversy. Serious side effects can occur in patients taking the drug, particularly if prescribers fail to consider or are unaware of potentially harmful interactions with other medications. In 2007 the FDA issued a warning against using SSRI or SNRI antidepressants with certain medications commonly prescribed for migraine headaches. However, many patients are finding the relief the drug provides from both pain and depression to be worth the risks. As with any medication, the potential risks and benefits should be discussed with a qualified physician who is aware of all medications the patient may be taking in order to minimize the risk of side effects and drug interactions.