|
|
Post by jlee1962 on Aug 8, 2013 11:38:36 GMT -5
I am a recovering smoker - I recommend that you consider the electronic cigs. I preferred NJoy, my brother liked Blue. You can buy them anywhere you buy cigarettes. It should easily get you through the day. You can sneak one in the bathroom without breaking the law. It will give you the satisfied feeling you get from a nice long drag to relieve the stress.
|
|
|
|
Post by bartleby on Aug 8, 2013 11:40:42 GMT -5
Lurker, you noted, "and it's a back or mental impairment that smoking doesn't effect, then I don't care if they smoke." Number one cause of failed back surgery is smoking.. You don't think nicotine affects the brain and mental problems??
|
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Aug 8, 2013 11:41:28 GMT -5
The thing that everyone needs to remember here is that "causation" is NOT an issue in SSA law like it is in med mal or others. Here, it is the resultant limitations imposed by the various impairments without the judgement. The two issues of (1) not following prescribed treatment and (2) drugs and/or alcohol abuse have their distinct and very exact rulings to follow on each. In the case of drugs and/or alcohol it is basically whether the individual would still be disabled absent drugs and/or alcohol. It does NOT matter whether drugs and/or alcohol "caused" their conditions (hepatitis, liver failure etc.). Following prescribed treatment can be used as a credibility factor as can illegal drug use, but this is different than "causation" and different than what needs to be done to determine the DAA issues. These intricate issues are often confused by writers and ALJs. I do not think admonishing anyone about their behavior is appropriate in any forum. It does nothing to change the individual and all it will do is make the recipient defensive....heck, look at the responses on this board! LOL! The problem is if a claimant's physician states the claimant's emphysema or COPD would dramatically improve if they stopped chain smoking, then indeed the chain smoking is one of the major causes of their disability. Failure to follow prescribed treatment can be a basis for denial. Just as if someone refuses to get his arm reset after breaking it would be denied for failure to follow prescribed treatment. |
|
|
|
Post by lildavey on Aug 8, 2013 12:00:44 GMT -5
I do understand bartleby's comment about smoking. If an ALJ has to admonish a client about smoking and the deleterious effects upon one's health, it doesn't seem to sit that well if that ALJ happens to be a smoker. I'm pretty sure that people who are still smoking have tried unsuccessfullly to quit. It is an addiction. I'm not sure why a judge should be scolding someone about smoking or anything else. I do not see that as part of the job. I wouldn't have thought so, either, but I stumbled upon a website that has "reviews" on ODAR judges. I can understand disappointed claimants being bitter, but a lot of these are written by lawyers. Some of this behavior, if even half true, is astonishing. It would curl my hair if I had any left! www.disabilityjudges.com/ |
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Aug 8, 2013 12:23:17 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure that people who are still smoking have tried unsuccessfullly to quit. It is an addiction. I'm not sure why a judge should be scolding someone about smoking or anything else. I do not see that as part of the job. I wouldn't have thought so, either, but I stumbled upon a website that has "reviews" on ODAR judges. I can understand disappointed claimants being bitter, but a lot of these are written by lawyers. Some of this behavior, if even half true, is astonishing. It would curl my hair if I had any left! www.disabilityjudges.com/I would only trust about 10% or less of what is written there, pro and con. Yes, there are issues, but there are good and bad apples in every profession or occupation, including ALJs and attorneys. |
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Aug 8, 2013 12:28:59 GMT -5
The thing that everyone needs to remember here is that "causation" is NOT an issue in SSA law like it is in med mal or others. Here, it is the resultant limitations imposed by the various impairments without the judgement. The two issues of (1) not following prescribed treatment and (2) drugs and/or alcohol abuse have their distinct and very exact rulings to follow on each. In the case of drugs and/or alcohol it is basically whether the individual would still be disabled absent drugs and/or alcohol. It does NOT matter whether drugs and/or alcohol "caused" their conditions (hepatitis, liver failure etc.). Following prescribed treatment can be used as a credibility factor as can illegal drug use, but this is different than "causation" and different than what needs to be done to determine the DAA issues. These intricate issues are often confused by writers and ALJs. I do not think admonishing anyone about their behavior is appropriate in any forum. It does nothing to change the individual and all it will do is make the recipient defensive....heck, look at the responses on this board! LOL! The problem is if a claimant's physician states the claimant's emphysema or COPD would dramatically improve if they stopped chain smoking, then indeed the chain smoking is one of the major causes of their disability. Failure to follow prescribed treatment can be a basis for denial. Just as if someone refuses to get his arm reset after breaking it would be denied for failure to follow prescribed treatment. This is my point....it is the fine difference between cause and failing to follow treatment. For instance, in your example, both are going on...the smoking caused the COPD AND if he stops it will get better. Two different issues though. If an individual's COPD is so far gone that even if they DO quit and follow the advice, it may not matter....hence the causation is irrelevant. Like liver failure, once you get to a certain point, it does not matter at all if the individual did something to cause it. I just see many confuse these and use causation to deny....he used drugs and he has liver failure, so deny because he "caused" it. Wrong analysis. Super technical and fodder the AC if it is not put into the right terms. Ok, break over... back to work I go! LOL! |
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Aug 8, 2013 12:38:42 GMT -5
I think religion is another subject that should stay out of these threads, regardless of the motivation for posting about it. JMHO.  |
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Aug 8, 2013 12:46:33 GMT -5
The problem is if a claimant's physician states the claimant's emphysema or COPD would dramatically improve if they stopped chain smoking, then indeed the chain smoking is one of the major causes of their disability. Failure to follow prescribed treatment can be a basis for denial. Just as if someone refuses to get his arm reset after breaking it would be denied for failure to follow prescribed treatment. This is my point....it is the fine difference between cause and failing to follow treatment. For instance, in your example, both are going on...the smoking caused the COPD AND if he stops it will get better. Two different issues though. If an individual's COPD is so far gone that even if they DO quit and follow the advice, it may not matter....hence the causation is irrelevant. Like liver failure, once you get to a certain point, it does not matter at all if the individual did something to cause it. I just see many confuse these and use causation to deny....he used drugs and he has liver failure, so deny because he "caused" it. Wrong analysis. Super technical and fodder the AC if it is not put into the right terms. Ok, break over... back to work I go! LOL! I think we are on the same page. Yes, if someone has shot their liver because of drinking they are still entitled to their disability because even without the use of alcohol now their liver isn't going to improve, so they are disabled. I am glad there are others on this Board who understand the issues clearly. |
|
|
|
Post by lurker/dibs on Aug 8, 2013 13:37:40 GMT -5
Lurker, you noted, "and it's a back or mental impairment that smoking doesn't effect, then I don't care if they smoke." Number one cause of failed back surgery is smoking.. You don't think nicotine affects the brain and mental problems?? Actually, Bartleby, I don't think nicotine effects brain and mental problems to the extent of reaching a disability. I think nicotine and smoking may slow the healing processes for a physical condition, but I certainly don't think that smoking will cause someone to have "failed back syndrome" or cause someone to have multiple back surgeries. Perhaps I am sympathetic to smokers, idk. I just don't think smoking is the evil that some people think it is. My great grandmother smoked and lived to be 106. I think health is primarily genetic. With all due respect, you sound like one of my ALJ's that actually said that my claimant's IQ of 56 was caused by him smoking marijuana (one positive drug screen through about 4 years of monthly drug screens at the free clinic), to which I argued that school records since elementary school, plus two IQ tests through CE's, showed his IQ from 49-58 through the years and that he didn't start smoking marijuana until he was 20 and he was 22 at the time of the hearing. Sometimes people self-medicate, sometimes people don't know any better, and sometimes people just don't care about the physical effects of what they do. I'd be in the latter group. I understand the rules. I argue them every day. Today, for example, I got to argue that someone with full blown AIDS, Gout, GERD, DDD, and bilateral torn rotator cuffs who was over the age of 50 would still have the same medical conditions even if he wasn't smoking marijuana. He testified that without insurance he can't fill his pain medications on a regular basis and his brother helps take care of him and provides the marijuana--he's not spending money on it. He deserves to be paid, regardless of the fact that he smokes cigarettes and/or marijuana. As I have said multiple times, please do not take offense to the things I say/type here. I am simply expressing my opinions and only the opinions of myself. Others can and do disagree with me daily. I take no offense. |
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Aug 8, 2013 14:01:08 GMT -5
Lurker, you noted, "and it's a back or mental impairment that smoking doesn't effect, then I don't care if they smoke." Number one cause of failed back surgery is smoking.. You don't think nicotine affects the brain and mental problems?? Actually, Bartleby, I don't think nicotine effects brain and mental problems to the extent of reaching a disability. I think nicotine and smoking may slow the healing processes for a physical condition, but I certainly don't think that smoking will cause someone to have "failed back syndrome" or cause someone to have multiple back surgeries. Perhaps I am sympathetic to smokers, idk. I just don't think smoking is the evil that some people think it is. My great grandmother smoked and lived to be 106. I think health is primarily genetic. With all due respect, you sound like one of my ALJ's that actually said that my claimant's IQ of 56 was caused by him smoking marijuana (one positive drug screen through about 4 years of monthly drug screens at the free clinic), to which I argued that school records since elementary school, plus two IQ tests through CE's, showed his IQ from 49-58 through the years and that he didn't start smoking marijuana until he was 20 and he was 22 at the time of the hearing. Sometimes people self-medicate, sometimes people don't know any better, and sometimes people just don't care about the physical effects of what they do. I'd be in the latter group. I understand the rules. I argue them every day. Today, for example, I got to argue that someone with full blown AIDS, Gout, GERD, DDD, and bilateral torn rotator cuffs who was over the age of 50 would still have the same medical conditions even if he wasn't smoking marijuana. He testified that without insurance he can't fill his pain medications on a regular basis and his brother helps take care of him and provides the marijuana--he's not spending money on it. He deserves to be paid, regardless of the fact that he smokes cigarettes and/or marijuana. As I have said multiple times, please do not take offense to the things I say/type here. I am simply expressing my opinions and only the opinions of myself. Others can and do disagree with me daily. I take no offense. Bartleby gets a little bit upset when it comes to drinking and smoking, especially when it comes to kitties.  |
|
|
|
Post by lurker/dibs on Aug 8, 2013 14:08:12 GMT -5
Ha ha!
|
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Aug 8, 2013 17:28:07 GMT -5
Been laying back on this thread but decided to jump in.
Funky is a smoker. love it. won't quit till I have to and am now lookin in to alternatives for test day.
Now, I'm also a reasonably intelligent guy and know its harmful. But it is my health aned my choice. I never doit around nonsmokers as I would never impose my choice on others. I only ask the same consideration.
In regard to disability, I think if you have money to smoke you have money to buy meds. part of my upbringing to make sure needs are covered before wants.
Also, if you have a condition aggravated by smoking and you keep doing it, well that either shows you are an idiot or the smoking has a tighter grip than whatever ails you. either way it goes to credibility. same with obesity, alcohol, drugs and most other vices and actvities.
|
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Aug 8, 2013 18:20:10 GMT -5
Been laying back on this thread but decided to jump in. Funky is a smoker. love it. won't quit till I have to and am now lookin in to alternatives for test day. Now, I'm also a reasonably intelligent guy and know its harmful. But it is my health aned my choice. I never doit around nonsmokers as I would never impose my choice on others. I only ask the same consideration. In regard to disability, I think if you have money to smoke you have money to buy meds. part of my upbringing to make sure needs are covered before wants. Also, if you have a condition aggravated by smoking and you keep doing it, well that either shows you are an idiot or the smoking has a tighter grip than whatever ails you. either way it goes to credibility. same with obesity, alcohol, drugs and most other vices and actvities. Interesting. I made the assumption that anyone who is still smoking has tried and can't quit. I stand corrected. Not necessarily accusing funky of this, but being a former smoker myself, there are a lot of smokers that rationalize their inability to quit by saying they'll quit when they want to. I have friends like that. I know 60-year-olds like that. My grandfather is 80-something years old, and I think he only recently accepted that he couldn't quit. Then again, there are certainly some people that probably can quit at will but have no desire to do so. |
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Aug 8, 2013 18:50:13 GMT -5
Never tried to quit. have a physical every year and never seen anill effect. got some high cholesterol, but that's from my addiction to french fries. tried to quit those ba$tards.
Everything enjoyable in life has a cost. I pay for the smokes and pay the higher insurance premiums. if I ever see a health impact I will give quitting a go. till then the enjoymentis worth the cost.
Again, I don't smoke around the wife kids or any nonsmoker. my right to do any activity ends when it impacts someone else's right to be free of that activity.
Further, I have assumed the risk and costs. personally, Idon't wanna see anyone come bellyaching for taxpayer funding after their educated choices made them ill. I know we have to consider such impairments as copd and liver cirrhosis. butif you have that and continue to smoke or imbibe judge funky will not find you terribly credible. Of course, the same for those obese that don't follow exercise and diet reccs.
In short, I don't believe in victimless crimes. you wanna smoke, drink, eat a big mac or do drugs and aren't hurting anyon3e but yourself then go for it. justdon't expect someone else to pay the tab for your fun.
|
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Aug 8, 2013 19:18:21 GMT -5
Never tried to quit. have a physical every year and never seen anill effect. got some high cholesterol, but that's from my addiction to french fries. tried to quit those ba$tards. Everything enjoyable in life has a cost. I pay for the smokes and pay the higher insurance premiums. if I ever see a health impact I will give quitting a go. till then the enjoymentis worth the cost. Again, I don't smoke around the wife kids or any nonsmoker. my right to do any activity ends when it impacts someone else's right to be free of that activity. Further, I have assumed the risk and costs. personally, Idon't wanna see anyone come bellyaching for taxpayer funding after their educated choices made them ill. I know we have to consider such impairments as copd and liver cirrhosis. butif you have that and continue to smoke or imbibe judge funky will not find you terribly credible. Of course, the same for those obese that don't follow exercise and diet reccs. In short, I don't believe in victimless crimes. you wanna smoke, drink, eat a big mac or do drugs and aren't hurting anyon3e but yourself then go for it. justdon't expect someone else to pay the tab for your fun. All of that is easy enough to say, but when the health impairment shows up as Type II diabetes, heart disease, lung cancer, etc etc, after years of not seeing any immediate health effects, it is often too late. And society DOES absorb the cost; hence our health care crisis. Not saying this to judge because I sure have my own struggles and choices, but I think you've set it out a bit simplistically. Never been accused of being complicated. Yeah, society absorbs some health care costs. they do the same from sugar, red meat, alcohol, sex, driving, and any number of things people eat, drink and do voluntarily everyday. you can regulate them all and take the enjoyment out of life. when they do, they can make an argument about my smoking. |
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Aug 8, 2013 20:18:40 GMT -5
Never tried to quit. have a physical every year and never seen anill effect. got some high cholesterol, but that's from my addiction to french fries. tried to quit those ba$tards. Everything enjoyable in life has a cost. I pay for the smokes and pay the higher insurance premiums. if I ever see a health impact I will give quitting a go. till then the enjoymentis worth the cost. Again, I don't smoke around the wife kids or any nonsmoker. my right to do any activity ends when it impacts someone else's right to be free of that activity. Further, I have assumed the risk and costs. personally, Idon't wanna see anyone come bellyaching for taxpayer funding after their educated choices made them ill. I know we have to consider such impairments as copd and liver cirrhosis. butif you have that and continue to smoke or imbibe judge funky will not find you terribly credible. Of course, the same for those obese that don't follow exercise and diet reccs. In short, I don't believe in victimless crimes. you wanna smoke, drink, eat a big mac or do drugs and aren't hurting anyon3e but yourself then go for it. justdon't expect someone else to pay the tab for your fun. And the scary part is that once people do start having symptoms from smoking, there is already harm that cannot be undone. That is why it is so hard for people to quit...it takes forever to finally see the effects and it is easy to say I will quit when I have issues. So be careful funky! Got my RN hat on. But then again, there are many folks out there that do everything totally right and still end up with cancer of something. So many things play into all illnesses, genetics, environment, stress, etc. All you can do is to try and minimize the things that we know are carcinogenic as best we can, and try to find balance in life, be happy and do what is right for YOU. There is a lot to be said for doing things that minimize stress and sometimes that means indulging. I have found that many of the folks we see who choose to smoke over taking meds when it comes to money....they feel hopeless, like it will not matter anymore since they can't afford all of their meds. They don't know how to prioritize which meds they can afford and which they can let slide. They feel that they have lost everything and at the very least they have the comfort of smoking, giving them "some" kind of control and it helps relieve their stress. Hard to understand but if it was simple, there would not be so many in this predicament. No black and white answers! |
|
|
|
Post by lurker/dibs on Aug 8, 2013 20:42:40 GMT -5
Funky, I do believe we are kindred spirits! Maybe we can have a smoke together in DC. I believe our dates overlap.
|
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Aug 8, 2013 21:07:57 GMT -5
"Yeah, society absorbs some health care costs. they do the same from sugar, red meat, alcohol, sex, driving, and any number of things people eat, drink and do voluntarily everyday. you can regulate them all and take the enjoyment out of life. when they do, they can make an argument about my smoking." I'm not following this in the context of the former discussion. In any event,I was the person who said I was not going to lecture someone about their nicotine addition, alcoholism, drug addiction, obesity (unless of of course they are my kids and guaranteed not to listen to me) and I do not believe it is a judge's job to do so. The judge does his/her job and evaluates the evidence and comes to a conclusion based on the applicable rules. If that means that the claimant's conduct prevents disability payment under established precepts and the result of that is that the person reaches bottom and seeks help and goes on the path to recovery, that is great. But, I am pretty sure yet another lecture is not going to do it. My issue here is that you say that you smoke because it feels good and you don't do it in front of your family and you pay a few extra bucks in medical premiums a month because of your choice. Because you believe it is a choice and makes life more pleasureable, therefore, other smokers, drinkers, drug users, overeaters are making the same kind of "choices" because it feels good. That is simply not true. Further, even if we are not smoking in front of our families, when the health fails, they are the ones who suffer. I've been there. Finally, society absorbs a whole lot more than "some health care costs." Taxpayers pay for the excellent health benefits that federal employees get. So, even though you may be paying a nominal amount in premiums, we are doing the heavy lifting economically. So, this is not a choice that only affects you. So, in short, smoke if you want, I hope you live to be 106. But simply because you believe it is a lifestyle choice, does not mean that it holds true for everyone. We agree about the role of the judge. our disagreements are slim. the wish that I live to be 106is nice in spirit but I have no desire for that. if those late years could be fruitful and enjoyable sure. but they rarely are and I've always been a quality over quantity kind of dude. As to my rather terse and less than eloquent argument concerning the societal costs, while it could be less terse and more eloquent it is nonetheless true. all arguments about activities that drive up the cost of healthcare eventually morphs into a debate on smoking. its bad. we know. but the number of smokers continually declines and few ever discuss the general cost increases from other equally stupid choices. parents plop kidsin front of the tv with a grape soda and feel they did their job cause they tell them not to smoke. schools have "smoke outs" then cancel PE classes and feed kids pizza at lunch. I am a respectful smoker. yet, Ican't tell you the number of times I've heard the "its bad for you lecture" and the "it drives up healthcare costs" argument from people that would get tired holding my towel at the gym and get out of breath between chili dog bites. And it is a personal choice. evenif you are addicted (as I no doubt am) you choose to continue to suffer that addiction. My personal position is quite "simplistic". stay thee f out of my personal choices that don't have a thing to do with you. andif your only argument is I and those like me drive up healthcare costs then don't be a hypocrite. don't have your own vices that have the same impact on costs but jump on me for mine. And as to an ssa hearing, you are dead on. copd, cancer, cirrhosis and other health detriments are compensable severe impairments. If your dr says you are too far gone for quitting to help, then keep on keeping on. butif you could quit and be better, well your credibity regarding how much you suffer is in question if you keep smoking or imbibing. and I'm sorry but if you tell me u don't take your diabetes meds cause you can't afford them but still smoke a pack a day that's not gonna win you any cred points either. I won't lecture, its their choice and they have every right to make it. but our choices have costs and this worldis pay to play. As surprising as it may be coming from an attorney to another attorney, I have no desire or need to convince you of my position. you are rightin most regards and have a right to your opinion and choices. all I want is the same right. |
|
|
|
Post by funkyodar on Aug 8, 2013 21:09:31 GMT -5
Funky, I do believe we are kindred spirits! Maybe we can have a smoke together in DC. I believe our dates overlap. Happy to lurker. I will be the guy chewing thru a box of toothpicks during the exam. |
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Aug 8, 2013 21:57:28 GMT -5
I don't think people looking for information on the actual topic of this thread are interested in debates about smoking. Since it's now reached the level of a personal argument, can we get back to something close to the topic?
|
|
