If someone decided they would rather be blind or missing their hands then ever have to work again, and were crazy enough to maim themselves, would S.S. deny them disability benefits because they did it to themselves?
I have to admit that this is a bit of a guess, but I would assume that the psychiatric problems would ensure social security benefits, with the self mutilation as a symptom of the disease.
That is, it would be the wackyness that would prevent the person from working, as opposed to the lack of 10 fingers.
I realize you’re looking at it from a legal disqualification perspective, which unfortunately I can’t address. I will add that the requirements for SSDI are very strict. The disability needs to render you completely unable to work at any job, not just your regular occupation. Neither blindness nor missing fingers alone should qualify a person. MMV in practice, I suppose.
I have found this site to have a lot of good information. Couldn’t find anything on self mutilation but did find this on not taking meds your supposed to:
*
5. Advice: Try your best to stay compliant with your prescribed medications. In the end, whether you took your prescribed medicine or not may affect how your impairments are viewed. In fact, judges will often deny claims in which claimants did not take what was prescribed. The fact that the claimant had no means by which to obtain their needed meds is generally irrelevant to an ALJ at a disability hearing. *
You’d think that if not taking your meds might get you denied, then self-mutilation might also.
A lot of insurance companies will deny payment for self-inflicted wounds/damage so why would social security be any different?
Lumpy, what’s going through your mind?
Really? That’s incredibly fucked up.
I seriously doubt that SS benefits could be denied on the circumstances causing the
disability. That would open the door to denying them for all kinds of claims of
negligence. If you dove into shallow water and were paralyzed. or drove drunk and
were seriously disabled, or neglected to use your seat belt, etc., etc. Even private
insurers who tried to deny a claim on such grounds would likely find themselves in
court and would have to convince a judge or jury that they had legal grounds for
breaching a contract.
I suspect that even the rule cited above, about failure to take meds., could be
defended against. Many psychiatric patients stop their meds., because of the side
effects, and it’s a constant battle to convince them, so it’s essentially part and parcel of
their disease.
A friend who worked for centrelink here in Australia told me self-inflicted wounds do dis-qualify people from disbality pension in Australia. He had a guy come into the office who had shot of two fingers with a shotgun delibrately. My friend told him because it was a delibrate injury he would not give him a disablity pension