Case Study 2: Social Security Administration Case
Student
Liberty University
Social Security Administration Case
Running head: Social Security Administration Case
This case centers on Vince Rogov. According to the reading he was denied disability
benefits multiple times and now is seeking the assistance a disabilities advocate. In this case
Social Security benefits advocate is Mr. Mike Lawrence who as are considered subject matter
experts in the process and regulations and assists people seeking benefits. The authors point out in
the reading that due to the increase in the administration’s caseload in recent years case workers
require thorough documentation proving that an individual is qualified for disability (Cropf, et al,
2012). If the documentation incomplete or does not having required documents, then the case
worker will deny the application. The case worker will explain to the applicant why as well as the
appeals process and that the applicant can leverage in an attempt to overturn the denial. It is in the
appeals process when the disability advocates are assigned and work with individuals.
Due to the large caseload of the Social Security Administration, it is common for
individuals to be denied at least the initial time of filing an application. The organizational culture,
as identified in a Federal Government Survey identified some serious issues. One problem is
leadership, tied to the turnover of political appointees. The survey cited that the change at the top
can lead to serious disruptions in the agency. As a result, SSA workers give the agency low scores
for effective leadership (11).
Applicable to Mr. Rogov’s case, Vince Rogov requested that Mike Lawrence take on his case
after initially being denied for disability. The following factors are being focused on:
Organizational Culture:
As stated, The Social Security Administration is suffering from decreasing budgets and a
smaller workforce in a period of time when caseloads are increasing, while attempting a
balance of service and stewardship (11).
2
Running head: Social Security Administration Case
During the five-year period from 2000 to 2005, applications for disability insurance
increased 60 percent to more than two million. This exponential growth has caused a
significant backlog of cases, which can extend for months or even years, from the initial
application (11).
According to the case study reading Mental illness presents perhaps the most challenging
disability decision (12).
Vince’s Case specifics:
Vince is a (Iraq) war veteran.
Vince’s physical medical issues are (well) documented by physicians at the Veterans
Administration (VA) hospital (14). NOTE: While the reading indicates the VA has
diagnosed “multiple medical problems” it is not clear whether mental diagnosis was
included. This point is raised as the author discusses how, “Despite multiple medical and
psychiatric issues, Vince had been denied disability benefits by SSA several times (14).
Vince’s history shows several medical conditions such as hypertension, history of cardiac
arrest, and back problems (14).
Vince may suffer from a mental disorder, but according to the case this disorder has not
been diagnosed by a medical professional such as a psychiatrist yet (14).
Vince’s frustration with the case led to a violent outburst in which he threatened bodily
harm to the field worker, the Administrative Law Judge, (Mike) the advocacy case
worker, as well as himself (14).
Mike Lawrence takes on Vince’s case and after more research in regard to Vince.
Through his research Mike notes that Vince needs further mental assessment for his emotional
3
Running head: Social Security Administration Case
and mental state during and after his deployment to Iraq. His family members and friends have
stated he has caused irreversible damage to their relationships.
Mike filed the appeals required to have a review of Vince’s disability denial and
scheduled a meeting with an administrative law judge (ALJ) who requested to see Vince at the
hearing and presentation of documentation so that he may observe Vince for himself. This
decision, when told to Vince by Mike did not sit well with Vince. It was during this discussion
Vince made threats to shoot everyone at the meeting. Mike Lawrence found this disturbing and
credible threat as Vince’s files also held his criminal records. In those records showed that Vince
had been known for carrying firearms proven by numerous weapons charges (13). Although
Vince called the following day apologizing for his statement and stating would never hurt
anyone, Mike was still apprehensive (14). Due to Vince’s history and possible mental disorder
Mike was unsure of how to handle the upcoming meeting.
In the end, the case states that Mike was still pondering over Vince’s statement, but that
he was on his way to the office of the administrative law judge (ALJ). This inference could mean
that Mike is going through with the meeting which is to include the field worker, Vince, the ALJ
and himself. This does not mean that Vince went through with his threats or that he actually
meant the threats in which he made. A logical conclusion is that Mike took Vince’s medical
history and criminal record into consideration before making the decision to attend this meeting
(14).
Moving Forward
From the perspective of the meeting and Vince’s threat, Mike has a moral and ethical
obligation to report Vince’s threat as well as seek assistance for Vince as it seems, from the case
4
Running head: Social Security Administration Case
that he has little to no family that will assist him in any form of treatment. However, the
administrative law meeting is a step in the right direction.
Due to the circumstances of this situation, Mike could refer Vince back to the VA to set
up an appointment with a psychiatrist for a mental evaluation and establish whether or not Vince
is in need of immediate treatment while the process of appeals takes place. Since the appeals
process may take months or even years this would be the fastest option for Vince and since the
case states that he has disability benefits through the VA, he already has access to the benefits
(12).
Mike conducted a thorough approach to Vince’s case, which may have given Mike the
confidence to carry out the meeting. While the reading does not indicate, it would be in
everyone’s best interest to have a law enforcement officer present in the room for the meeting.
Next the reading does not indicate, but training in the awareness to mental conditions of their
clients should be pursued. It is possible that due to mental illnesses in clients such as Vince may
facilitate the need for immediate adjudication of the case aside from the appeals process in order
to be able to properly present themselves to the individuals that make the decisions on the
appeals.
In conclusion, Mike should have reported Vince for his threats despite Vince’s assurance
that the threats were out of stress and frustration and therefore not credible. There were other
options that Mike could have taken to protect not only himself but others that were involved and
the well-being of his client. This case not only shows how difficult it is to gain disability benefits
from the Social Security Administration, but the ethical responsibility of the SSA and any
advocates that assist individuals in the appeals process for such disability benefits.
5
Running head: Social Security Administration Case
Galatians 6:2 (NKV) tells us, “Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill
the law of Christ.” It is through the work of advocates like Mike that carry forth the bible’s
teachings. He took the extra effort in researching Vince’s case. Hebrews 6:10 tells us that, “God
is not unjust; he will not forget your work and the love you have shown him as you have helped
his people and continue to help them.” Mike’s effort goes a long way to not only help Vince but
also restore the faith in the SSA while attempting to maintain the organizational culture of
service and stewardship the SSA works to institute.
6
