In attempting to understand others, it is important to gain a perspective from which the third party views the world. Understanding the third party perspective is a way to formulating an effective way of persuading a change in that person, if that is the goal. Or, perhaps understanding X merely in order to accept the behavior or actions of the individual, is enough of a reason.
In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, it is often important to understand the perspective of one’s treating doctor in order to obtain the necessary support and administrative initiation of the medical provider.
From the doctor’s viewpoint, it is normally counter-productive in terms of treatment and therapy to declare, ascertain and deem that the patient is “totally disabled”. Work is therapeutic; it allows for a teleological motivation which compels continuation in recuperative and rehabilitative terms.
Further, when this “fact” is combined with the general exposure of most doctors to other forms of disability benefits — state or federal OWCP benefits; Social Security Disability benefits; private disability insurance benefits — and rarely an encounter with FERS Disability Retirement issues, it becomes apparent why doctors often become reluctant and resistant to getting involved with the administrative process. Federal OWCP benefits require an assertion of causality-to-employment; SSDI necessitates a declaration of “total disability”; private disability policies can often lead to depositions and legal responses.
Thus, everything that is counterintuitive to a doctor’s perspective of what is therapeutically beneficial to the patient, is potentially there when presented with a request for support in a FERS Disability Retirement case.
Explanation is the key to understanding; effective explanation should persuade and alter a perspective founded upon a misinformed foundation. It is often necessary to explain the differences between FERS Disability Retirement benefits and the “others” which have previously polluted the waters of a pristine stream of thought.
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Federal Disability Retirement Attorney
|Disclaimer: While every effort has been made to confirm the accuracy of this article, it is not intended to provide legal advice as individual situations will differ and should be discussed with a lawyer expert in the field of Federal Disability Retirement law. For specific technical or legal advice on the information provided and related topics, please contact the author.|