I've been receiving social security disability income for five years. Now Social Security is doing an in depth review of my case. At first I just had to turn in a questionare. Now I have to meet with a doctor of their choosing next month who will make recommendations to them. And I have to fill out a longer questionare. My mother has to fill it out also. I'm on disability due to Bipolar II disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and OCD. I've tried to kill myself twice. They only one information from the last year. During the last year I attempted suicide and woke up in the hospital ICU on a ventilator.
I'm nervous because they just want more and more information when it seems so obvious I'm disabled.
Is it a bad sign when they go so far as to get you to see a psychiatrist they've chosen? This is just my review after 5 years. I feel like they want more and more information to deny me with. How many appeals do you get if they deny you after you've been on disability and do they continue to pay you? At what point should I hire an attorney? Are people who have to see a psychiatrist that social security has chosen usually denied or are the odds better?
Sorry to be so long winded. I'm just nervous with a lot of unanswered questions.
Thanks.

Hello Artemis,

When dealing with a Gov. Agency, reviews and the like are SOP. You must comply with their wishes to avoid any liability to them, or the dismissal of your claim. Depending on the Agency, one is usually afforded "the right to review" any decisions regarding changes to, or denial of, claim benefits. As you are referring to the topic of social welfare, this is probably a given.

If you disagree with their decision regarding your claim, you must request the review(s) and or hearings through legal process not unlike filing any other suit; it is highly recommended or mandatory that you procure the services of an attorney. However, the review and hearing process is usually more informal than that of an actual court. This can help or hinder your cause, as the burden of proof is less stringent, and the allowance of hearsay, and evidence that is less than the best evidence, is generally up to the reviewing board, and ultimately, the ALJ (Administrative Law Judge).

When in controversy with an Admin. Agency, one must exhaust all process available through the agency and their system of review and hearing. This can take a lot of time and effort; this also suggests the absolute necessity of legal council.

I know it seems unfair that one must comply with the mandates and processes of the agency, to fight the agency, but this is due to a couple things. First, the agency is regarded as the expert in the matters it covers, and review boards, hearings and courts give great deference to the agency's opinions and decisions based on that expertise. Second, one has no civil right to financial assistance from the agency. It is, for lack of a better term, a gift, to help certain people with disabilities, live a better, more normal life.

As for how many appeals you may be afforded regarding an adverse decision, this also is subject to the rules of the Agency. However, usually, but not always, after the process of reviews and hearings, one may be afforded the right to "Judicial Review." This means that the cause is heard in an actual court of law and equity, by a judge or court specializing in the general subject matter. The judge will decide if any civil rights have been violated and/or rights to "due process." In essence, the judge determines if the agency played fair and legal.

You see, while the agency, board or ALJ may be the experts on the subject matter of your claim, the reviewing court, is the expert on the law. Also, lest you think that the odds are too stacked against you when dealing with the agency's processes, ALJs and hearing boards are not employees of the agency, and are required to maintain seperation from the agency.

As to the last question, is one still paid when a claim is denied and while review is in process? No, but if the claim is reinstated subject to the review process, one is afforded back pay of benefits, and in some cases, damages. Often, I hear, there can also be negotiations for a settlement.

In closing, try not to get too worked up about it yet, what is happening is quite normal and probably required. It could even turn out better than you think in a variety of ways. Just do what they ask, and do not try to mislead anyone in any way in hopes of bettering your outcome. If they deny your claim, get an attorney; you may even want to consult one prior to a decision, if only for your own peace of mind.

Lawford

The agency may be required to conduct their own review periodically. You can learn more information here: http://www.lawinfo.com/index.cfm/fus.../categoryid/58.

Good luck.

To have your claim be given due course, you really have to follow the exact procedure as the agency requires. The medical assessment of the doctor chosen by the agency is a customary procedure that you have to follow. The information/ requirements asked of you by the agency are part of the whole process.

At this stage, you need to seek a sound legal advice of a social security lawyer. Having a lawyer at your side would ease up everything and put your claim on the best lights.

Welcome.