Last Updated on June 9, 2012 by FERS Disability Attorney
Moving forward with the right tools is generally more effective than looking back and trying to correct deficiencies; thus, the age-old adage of being penny wise, pound foolish applies; and in preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, it is important to make a determination early on to clearly assess the strength of a case, the needs required to optimize such strengths, and to obtain assistance where necessary.
As to an objective assessment of a case: one is normally not the best evaluator in analyzing the strength or weakness of one’s own Federal Disability retirement case. This is because of a self-evident principle operating in each such Federal Disability Retirement case: the subject who suffers from the medical condition cannot objectively evaluate from a third-party’s perspective the viability of a case in terms of proving by a preponderance of the evidence the coherence and compelling nature of the evidence to be presented.
Most believe that his or her case is a “slam-dunk”; few in actual reality ever are. To get denied by OPM at the First Stage; then at the Reconsideration Stage; then to go pro se before the Merit Systems Protection Board; then to obtain a lawyer — while it is good to get a lawyer at any stage of the process — is it wise to attempt a retrospective correction of one’s mistakes? At what stage does it become too late? Where in the process does “correction” override “mistakes”? Compare that to a prospective affirmation of one’s inadequacies — that it is difficult, if not impossible, to objectively evaluate one’s own case; that an effective compilation and presentation of a Federal Disability Retirement case is necessary in order to win in a Federal Disability Retirement case; and that providing a legal citationin support of one’s case is an essential element of a compelling case: combining it all, it would seem that being wise for the pound is preferable than being foolish for the penny (to make an inverse adage applicable).
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire