I lost my disability case. The hearing is over, the decision is made, but the fight goes on. Now I have to sit down with my legal counsel and talk about the ruling.
The court sent me the Decision Rationale. In four two-sided pages this document explains the judge's finding of "not disabled." Given among the reasons for this finding are the fact that I can play video games, that I am married, that I use social media, that I am able to eat in public with my wife, that I can feed my cats and myself, and that I have "been able to work through difficulties with social interaction as [I have] been able to push through this way through [sic] the situation when there was no alternative." The document describes as "allegations" my reports of real experience, which I suppose isn't unusual but which makes me feel dehumanized nonetheless. My chronic insomnia, a well documented symptom of PTSD, is dismissed as an allegation that can't be corroborated. And I suppose it can't be unless one were to live with me as my wife does, but the judge only met me once for 30 minutes.
I've occasionally been able to work through difficulties in social interaction. I've worked through them as Aron Ralston forced himself to cut off his own arm after a canyoneering accident. I've endured misery alone because, as the court shows, sometimes people who can help just won't because they don't understand why they should. But I'm bad at helping myself and I've had no success trying to do so. I've also backed down before. I've tried to face some challenges but certainly not all. I've been homeless, hungry, and despondent because I couldn't take appropriate action on my own behalf. It took me decades to seek psychiatric help, which is why I was diagnosed so late with problems I've always had. To the detriment of my mental health I've often retreated when I should have advanced. Other times, with the same bad results, I've acted against fear out of self-preservation like an animal. To rule that I don't have significant difficulties because I have suffered before, and that I must therefore proceed with nothing into even more suffering, is like telling Aron Ralston that he must now go and get his intact arm pinned under a boulder. The judge's reasoning here is absurd. But if it breaks no SSA rules there can be no appeal. That is what my legal counsel says. He tells me, "The Judge can essentially make any opinion he wants, if he just provides the logic." And the logic doesn't even have to be sound as long as it's not illegal. This is shocking to learn, but perhaps it shouldn't be. I feel like I should have known all along that the judge was not accountable for making reasonable decisions.
It's true that I can play video games. The judge opines that this shows that I can handle social interactions. But I play solo, having no interest in working with or against other players. I don't want those interactions. I play video games in part to avoid socializing or to de-stress after being forced to socialize. When I use social media, it is to share my art. I don't use social media to socialize. I try to use it as a marketing tool, and I am very bad at using it that way because I am socially incompetent. This is evident fro.my lack of any career progress after two decades as an artist. I can create art in a bubble of safety. Outside of it I can barely function. Furthermore, when my wife and I go out we can't stay out very long because being in public is too stressful for me. My wife understands my special needs and she is part of my safety systems. She protects me when we go out in public.
Speaking of which, the Decision Rationale says that I am "married, despite allegations that [I have] problems getting along with others." My wife is aware of my social inhibitions and she still loves me. The court seems to have ignored her agency completely in its assessment of what my being married meant for my allegations of social problems. I interpret this as an insult to my wife. When I read this document, I wonder what the judge thought I did when using social media or playing video games. What did she think my experience going in public with my wife was like? She certainly didn't ask me to describe those experiences from my perspective.
The Decision Rationale uses to support the finding of "not disabled" the fact that I can do creative work, such as writing music, writing books, and creating comics. What the document doesn't explain is why a disabled person should necessarily be unable to do those things. Temple Grandin, herself on the spectrum, wrote a number of books and is an internationally famous speaker on autism. She also uses social media. This doesn't mean that she doesn't have significant social difficulties. It doesn't mean she isn't disabled.
But I am not Dr. Grandin. I am an irritant the SSA would like to flick aside. I shall sound bitter in opining that they have no reason to want to help anyone. But I hope I shall sound reasonable in saying that it's been clear from my first filing in 2017 that they never intended to help me. The Decision Rationale contains no rationale. It contains instead blatant reaches for ways to condemn me to suffer. This is my opinion.
There certainly may be some who, because they don't see how I suffer, don't believe that I do. This is the curse of the invisible affliction. To know my experiences, one must at least hear me with an impartial ear. And at the most to do so one must spend more than half an hour in my company as an equal. But it was no court of equals that heard my case. It was a court of judgement drowned in work with no time to look deep into humanity.
Appealing to the SSA is a profoundly dispiriting endeavor. They mean it to be thus to discourage malingerers. I feel objectified and ignored. The judge treated me like a liar and reduced me to points on a ranking system that was designed for exclusion. I don't know that I will appeal even if I have grounds to. I have no faith in any adjudicator that may hear me because I believe it's impossible for any to hear me as they must to judge me fairly. And if I do proceed with an appeal I shall do so no more hopeful for success than I was when this harrowing ordeal began.
The court sent me the Decision Rationale. In four two-sided pages this document explains the judge's finding of "not disabled." Given among the reasons for this finding are the fact that I can play video games, that I am married, that I use social media, that I am able to eat in public with my wife, that I can feed my cats and myself, and that I have "been able to work through difficulties with social interaction as [I have] been able to push through this way through [sic] the situation when there was no alternative." The document describes as "allegations" my reports of real experience, which I suppose isn't unusual but which makes me feel dehumanized nonetheless. My chronic insomnia, a well documented symptom of PTSD, is dismissed as an allegation that can't be corroborated. And I suppose it can't be unless one were to live with me as my wife does, but the judge only met me once for 30 minutes.
I've occasionally been able to work through difficulties in social interaction. I've worked through them as Aron Ralston forced himself to cut off his own arm after a canyoneering accident. I've endured misery alone because, as the court shows, sometimes people who can help just won't because they don't understand why they should. But I'm bad at helping myself and I've had no success trying to do so. I've also backed down before. I've tried to face some challenges but certainly not all. I've been homeless, hungry, and despondent because I couldn't take appropriate action on my own behalf. It took me decades to seek psychiatric help, which is why I was diagnosed so late with problems I've always had. To the detriment of my mental health I've often retreated when I should have advanced. Other times, with the same bad results, I've acted against fear out of self-preservation like an animal. To rule that I don't have significant difficulties because I have suffered before, and that I must therefore proceed with nothing into even more suffering, is like telling Aron Ralston that he must now go and get his intact arm pinned under a boulder. The judge's reasoning here is absurd. But if it breaks no SSA rules there can be no appeal. That is what my legal counsel says. He tells me, "The Judge can essentially make any opinion he wants, if he just provides the logic." And the logic doesn't even have to be sound as long as it's not illegal. This is shocking to learn, but perhaps it shouldn't be. I feel like I should have known all along that the judge was not accountable for making reasonable decisions.
It's true that I can play video games. The judge opines that this shows that I can handle social interactions. But I play solo, having no interest in working with or against other players. I don't want those interactions. I play video games in part to avoid socializing or to de-stress after being forced to socialize. When I use social media, it is to share my art. I don't use social media to socialize. I try to use it as a marketing tool, and I am very bad at using it that way because I am socially incompetent. This is evident fro.my lack of any career progress after two decades as an artist. I can create art in a bubble of safety. Outside of it I can barely function. Furthermore, when my wife and I go out we can't stay out very long because being in public is too stressful for me. My wife understands my special needs and she is part of my safety systems. She protects me when we go out in public.
Speaking of which, the Decision Rationale says that I am "married, despite allegations that [I have] problems getting along with others." My wife is aware of my social inhibitions and she still loves me. The court seems to have ignored her agency completely in its assessment of what my being married meant for my allegations of social problems. I interpret this as an insult to my wife. When I read this document, I wonder what the judge thought I did when using social media or playing video games. What did she think my experience going in public with my wife was like? She certainly didn't ask me to describe those experiences from my perspective.
The Decision Rationale uses to support the finding of "not disabled" the fact that I can do creative work, such as writing music, writing books, and creating comics. What the document doesn't explain is why a disabled person should necessarily be unable to do those things. Temple Grandin, herself on the spectrum, wrote a number of books and is an internationally famous speaker on autism. She also uses social media. This doesn't mean that she doesn't have significant social difficulties. It doesn't mean she isn't disabled.
But I am not Dr. Grandin. I am an irritant the SSA would like to flick aside. I shall sound bitter in opining that they have no reason to want to help anyone. But I hope I shall sound reasonable in saying that it's been clear from my first filing in 2017 that they never intended to help me. The Decision Rationale contains no rationale. It contains instead blatant reaches for ways to condemn me to suffer. This is my opinion.
There certainly may be some who, because they don't see how I suffer, don't believe that I do. This is the curse of the invisible affliction. To know my experiences, one must at least hear me with an impartial ear. And at the most to do so one must spend more than half an hour in my company as an equal. But it was no court of equals that heard my case. It was a court of judgement drowned in work with no time to look deep into humanity.
Appealing to the SSA is a profoundly dispiriting endeavor. They mean it to be thus to discourage malingerers. I feel objectified and ignored. The judge treated me like a liar and reduced me to points on a ranking system that was designed for exclusion. I don't know that I will appeal even if I have grounds to. I have no faith in any adjudicator that may hear me because I believe it's impossible for any to hear me as they must to judge me fairly. And if I do proceed with an appeal I shall do so no more hopeful for success than I was when this harrowing ordeal began.
I'm sorry it happened, it has to be very frustrating to go thru this ordeal
ReplyDeleteThanks. It is indeed.
Delete