Remastered Q&A: SSDI, Mental Health, and the Meaning of a Disability Finding

0:25 Okay, when you're awarded social Security disability, but that's does that means you are adjudicated as mentally ill? And I understand, I think I understand what this person is asking. A person goes before let's go with the court. That's usually the easiest one for me. A judge makes a determination that you get a fully favorable decision based on your condition.

0:46 And you're asking you if the reason that you were found disabled was based predicated on social securities, I'm excuse me, based on your mental health impairment. Is the judge making an independent adjudication that you are mentally ill? It's not that clear cut and clean like this, because let me tell you why they're not. The judge is not saying I have decreed this person is mentally ill. That's really not the way it flows. What it is is that the judge is gonna, let's let's follow let me just kind of work it through the process. What happens is the judge makes a determination that the severity of your condition complies with these five step sequential evaluation. Now that's a whole lot of goblygook, But what basically what the

1:29 judge is saying, are you disabled he is saying that you are disabled. He is he's into a judicial ruling based on his decision or her decision, that you meet the criteria of the SOE Security Administration, and therefore you are disabled. Now, if they ask the question what impairments that he or she believe were of such severity that renders you disabled? Then if it's mental health is your primary thing, let's say that you've been You're applying for disability based on depression and anxiety. The judge makes a determination that one, you've been out of work for twelve months.

2:07 Two you have a severe impairment, and that severe impairment this lasted twelve months or more, is anxiety and depression. He or she doesn't believe that you meet the listings of medical conditions to satisfy that under step three, but under step four, he or she determined that you're a depression anxiety is so severe that you couldn't do anything you used to do, or step five that you couldn't do anything else. So this is going to sound goofy to answer your question based on the way I explained it, you're probably saying so basically, you're telling me that they did not in so many words, Yes, but not really because basically the judge's not saying I have determined that this individual is mentally ill. I've adjudicated them mentally ill. No,

2:51 that's not what the judge is doing. What the judge is saying is that you are unable to work due to your disability. You have a severe impairment that disays you from work. So this is the reason why I say this is this. If you've noticed and when you look at like when you hear competency hearings and Marchmen hearings and Baker Acts and so forth, they're not looking at adjudicating you of a particular standpoint. What they're doing is that they're comparing it against something like for instance, let's back it up. I know I'm saying a couple of high technical phrases, but let me make it a look clear. For instance, in Florida, there is what we call a Baker Act, but in other states it has a different name, but it's called involuntary admissions. Basically, what

3:39 happens is is that in some scenarios, if certain providers have a reason to believe, whether it be doctors, dentists, teachers from you know, in some cases. In some places, judges things like that, if those individuals have a reason to believe that your mental health condition renders you a danger to yourself or others, potentially a danger to yourself or others, you could be involuntarily admitted to a psychiatric facility for three to seven days until your condition stabilizes to you are no longer a threat. Now have they adjudicated you mentally ill? Now what they've said is, you've got a mental illness that causes this effect, and we believe it's of this severity. We believe that it's of this severity that causes this to happen. So what they're

4:36 basically saying, your mentally ill, and we think your mental illness may cause you to hurt yourself or somebody else. Same instance, So the judge is saying, you're mentally ill, and we think your mental illness prevents you from being able to work. Now he didn't say or she didn't say, your mental illness prevented you from being able to go to the bathroom, or go to the mall, or go to the grocery storm, because that's not what the judge is looking at. The judges looking at, does your impairment prevent your ability to work. And the reason why I stress this is because when you're saying, they are they adjudicating me mentally ill. And I'm like, the problem with making a blanket statement like that is one of the doctor.

5:16 The judge is not making a legal diagnosis, because what you're basically saying is I'm mentally ill, and the court is recognized that I am mentally ill. No, the court is not recognizing anything. The court is saying that the medical evidence supports that you have a severe diagnosis of a condition, and that condition is so severe you can't work, plain and simple. So I tell people this, So don't all go walking down the street with the piece of paper saying the judge says I'm mentally ill. It's not what the judge is saying. The judge is saying you have a severe mental impairment. The doctors are saying you're mentally ill. The judge is saying that when looking all through your medical records, that your condition is of such

5:54 a severity it's so severe you can't work. So I say that to say this, don't get caught up in what the fact of the nice little bells and whistles so that you're sitting here because I know what happens, and I'm not knocking you. And you may not be doing this because I've had clients who have done this.

6:11 They want to take the document and use it for another purpose. So they want to be able to say definitively that this says this, so that they can apply it to something else. Don't make it difficult. The court has made a determination that your mental health condition prevents you from being able to do work. They're not adjudicating.

6:30 They're not adjudicating your mental illness. They're not giving a sense of legal they're not giving a legal I wouldn't say stability or definitive definition, whatever hypertechnical phrase. They're not validating your mental health condition. It's not like the doctor said your mentally ill and then the judge comes and says, yeah, I agree, you're mentally ill. Or like you see in a criminal context where a doctor says, an this person can't stand trial because their mental or their mental capabilities, and then the judge says, I have determine this person is legally incompetent. That's a different context than what we have here. So don't get caught up in the Bells and Wilson's and get caught up in the hyperbole and

7:10 the grander scheme of things. What the court is doing is they're not adjudicating or providing legal validity to your mental health impairment. They're basically saying that your condition satisfy as the criteria for Social Security to demonstrate that you cannot do work because of your mental health condition. I hope that clears things up a bit.