Archive for 'Disability Rights'
$100K awarded to woman with chemical sensitivity denied proper accomodations at work
Posted on Mar 10, 2010 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, MCS, Susie Collins, Worker's Rights
Woman with chemical sensitivity awarded $100K for being denied proper accommodations at work; her coworker’s perfume made it difficult for her to breathe.
Modern perfume contains known toxic chemicals that can cause serious cognitive and respiratory problems in people with chemical sensitivity.
On Point reports a Detroit city planner with an allergy to perfume is savoring the sweet smell of legal success after the city agreed to pay her $100,000 and be more sensitive to the chemically sensitive.
The agreement -– obtained by On Point through a public records act request — settled Susan McBride’s lawsuit under the Americans With Disabilities Act which alleged the City of Detroit failed to reasonably accommodate her allergy after she complained that a co-worker’s perfume made it difficult for her to breathe.
Some critics attacked McBride for being overly sensitive and abusing the court system. But many workplaces are now perfume-free and a judge in November 2008 denied the city’s motion to dismiss, ruling McBride could proceed with a disability claim “based on the major life activity of breathing.”
As part of the settlement, which the parties signed last month, the city will post a notice on bulletin boards in its offices announcing that “Our goal is to be sensitive to employees with perfume and chemical sensitivities”
Let’s hope it sets precedent for future cases. If you have Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and are having trouble with your employer giving you proper accommodations, you might like to share the agreement with them. This is an access issue, the same as any other disability protected under the ADA.
<a href=”http://www.flickr.com/photos/momoe365photos/4154731316/”>Photo credit.
Continue Reading
Please sign Italian petition for recognition of Multiple Chemcial Sensitivity
Posted on Mar 07, 2010 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, MCS, Social Justice, Susie Collins
Our fellow canaries in Italy are asking for our support: Please take a minute to sign this petition for the recognition of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity in Italy.
Italian flag
There are just a couple more days left to sign in support of the Italian petition to recognize Multiple Chemical Sensitivity. In the middle of March, the Association for Chronic and/or Environmental Diseases by Intoxication (AMICA) will meet with Senators to present the petition. Please sign; last day to sign is March 10.
Click here to sign– it’s all in Italian, so once you get to that page, click on “Firma,” then fill in the fields for First Name, Last Name, Email, Telephone (not necessary), and postal code (CAP). Direct link here to sign the petition.
THE PETITION TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH:
Petition promoted by the Association for Chronic and/or Environmental Diseases by Intoxication (AMICA) www.sensibilitachimica.it
To the Presidency of the Senate of the Italian Republic
To the President of the Chamber of Deputies
To the XII Committee of the Social Affairs at the Chamber of Deputies
To the XII Commission of the Senate Health and Hygiene
Since the Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS) is a chronic disabling condition that involves multiorgan reactions to exposure to various chemicals in quantities normally tolerated by the general population and that the diagnostic criteria were established by international consensus in 1999;
Seen that from 2 to 10% of the population is hyper-sensitive to environmental chemicals and products in common use and an increasing proportion is affected by multiple substances – that is suffering multiple chemical sensitivity, or MCS – with impaired capacity for work, social life and autonomy that varies from mild to very severe depending on the stages of the disease;
Since the MCS is recognized in the United States by federal law for the Disabled American with Disabilities Act, federal agencies – such as the Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Housing and Urban Development, the Social Security Administration – and many local governments;
Since the MCS is recognized by Canada federal and Provincial government agencies;
Since the MCS is classified by Germany since 1998 in the International Code of Diseases by the T 78.4 in Chapter 19 (Injury, poisoning and other consequences resulting from external causes) and Section T66-T78 (Other and unspecified damage from external factors);
As the Ministry of Welfare and Labor of Germany, who had classified the MCS in the of list of motor disability (as compared to those for the inability of patients to move), has removed the description of illness as psychosomatic (of psychological origin / Psychiatry), putting an end to discrimination of this disease environment;
As the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare and the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (Japan), which for years have recognized the sick building syndrome – similar to the MCS, said insert MCS October 2009 in the list of diseases covered by the insurance of the National Health Service;
Since in Italy there is no law that equalize the rights of the environmental patients (not only MCS, but also of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, to Elettrosensibilità of Fibromyalgia, Sick Building Syndrome, etc..) Than those of any other form of disability in terms of job protection, the right to treatment, the right to a home “safe”, etc..;
The petitioners demand that are challenged with the highest priority of the six bills initiative of the House of Representatives (No. 1621 August 5, 2008, No. 1654 of September 18, 2008, No. 1667 of 18 September 2008, N . 2287 March 12, 2009) and Senate (NS1019 of 17 September 2008, No. 1165 of 28 October 2008) for the recognition of MCS as a social disease, using the international consensus in 1999 as a benchmark for the diagnosis, as in the world.
Thanks Rose and Francesca! Keep up the good work!
Continue Reading
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity associations in Spain meet with Ministry of Health officials
Posted on Feb 05, 2010 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, Government Regulation, Guest Bloggers, MCS, Social Justice
Eva Caballé reports on the meeting between Multiple Chemical Sensitivity associations and Ministry of Health officals in Spain, Feb. 4, 2010
Translated from Spanish by Eva Caballé
On February 4th 2010 at 12:00h has been held the meeting with Ministry of Health to state the situation of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity sufferers in Spain.
Mr José Martínez Olmos, Secretary General of the Ministry of Health, Mr Alberto Infante Campos, General Director of Professional Planning, Cohesion of SNS and High Inspection and Mr Francisco Valero Bonilla have attended to the meeting representing the Ministry of Health. One person by almost each MCS association has attended to the meeting and also Jaume Cortés, lawyer of Colectivo Ronda, and Dr. Pablo Arnold, immunologist specialized in MCS.
• ACAF: Cristina Montané
• AFCISQUIM: María Roldán
• Alas de Mariposa- SQM: Tránsito Rodríguez
• ALTEA – SQM: Cristobalina Bejarano
• APQUIRA: Mª Carmen Gómez de Bonilla
• AQUA: Mario Arias
• ASQUIFYDE: Francisca Gutiérrez
• AVASFASEM-AVASQ: Francisca García
• ENA: Laura Domínguez
• MERCURIADOS: Mª Carmen Miravete
• Plataforma Estatal Contra la Contaminación Ambiental: Minerva Palomar
• PLATAFORMA PARA LA FM ,SFC, SQM, reivindicación de derechos, Asociación Nacional: Elena Navarro
A petitions document done by MCS associations under David Palma coordination has been submitted. This document has been signed by:
• ABAF: Margarita Pascual
• ACAF: Maite Ribera
• AFCISQUIM: María Roldán
• Alas de Mariposa- SQM: Irene Escudero
• ALTEA – SQM: Cristobalina Bejarano
• APQUIRA: Mª Carmen Gómez de Bonilla
• AQUA: Mario Arias
• ASQUIFYDE: Francisca Gutiérrez
• AVASFASEM-AVASQ: Francisca García
• ENA: Rosa de Gabriel
• MERCURIADOS: Servando Pérez
• Plataforma Estatal Contra la Contaminación Ambiental: Minerva Palomar
• PLATAFORMA PARA LA FM ,SFC, SQM, reivindicación de derechos, Asociación Nacional: Elena Navarro
• Eva Caballé
Also a copy of Desaparecida: Una vida rota por la Sensibilidad Química Múltiple (Missing: A life broken by Multiple Chemical Sensitivities) has been hand delivered on behalf of Eva Caballé, who couldn’t attend to the meeting, as an example of what MCS sufferers have to go through in Spain.
The meeting with Ministry of Health has meant an agreement on minimum standards by the Ministry, but a big hope for all MCS sufferers.
Representatives of Ministry of Health have committed to contact MCS associations within 2 weeks to jointly agree on experts to form a Scientific Committee to create a document of consensus on the MCS. They have stated that this is the first step to make possible the inclusion of the MCS in ICD-10, i.e. its official recognition as disease in Spain. They have demonstrated that later there would be necessary to start creating the protocols.
All people who have been part of this process are thrilled by the result of the meeting, because doors have opened us to obtain the recognition of the Multiple Chemical Sensitivity in Spain and to achieve that MCS sufferers have the same rights as the other chronically ill people.
Continue Reading
Request for help composing an advance letter to health care specialists
Posted on Feb 01, 2010 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, MCS, Susie Collins
What should be included in a letter to a physician that arrives before WE do?
Elaine Willis, who has Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and a host of other illnesses, contacted me for help in composing an advance letter for her health care specialists. She’d love to have input from as many people with MCS as possible. Please leave your thoughts in the comment section.
My family doctor (primary care physician) has asked that I prepare the letter that will go to specialists prior to my first arrival. It needs to elucidate in few words what to do to make my visit safe. It must also explain MCS (Multiple Chemical Sensitivity) to a physician who may have had no education about or exposure to a patient with the kind of symptoms I experience. My symptoms can be mild (for me) which may include coughing, asthma, brain fog and increased ataxia (you see I already I have ataxia – the hereditary kind). Or, they can be medium, slurred speech, severe ataxia, altered blood pressure, complete inability to focus or answer questions, stuttering, poor word-finding skills and dizziness. And of course, the biggie… anaphylaxis… and it happens too often.
So, my desire with this post is to engage the assistance of others with MCS. What should be included in a letter to a physician that arrives before WE do? First appointment of the day? No waiting? This is a brainstorm – so all ideas are accepted. I will choose the ones I want for my letter and post it. Maybe it will be useful for others, too!
Please leave your suggestions here in the comment section. Thank you!
~~~
Read more about Elaine here:
Perfume blogger dismisses concerns from a member of our community
Canadian teacher fights for her right to workplace accommodations
~~~
This post was originally published on Elaine’s blog and republished here on The Canary Report with her permission.
Continue Reading
Poster for fragrance-free hospital care
Posted on Jan 26, 2010 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, MCS, Susie Collins
This poster was designed as a public service project for patients requiring in-hospital care at hospitals that are still lacking a proper fragrance-free policy for the staff.
The poster comes in two versions: one for Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and one for Severe Allergic Asthma. Click here to download either one in print resolution.
I think the posters are FAB, but I knock off a couple points for using the word “allergen” in the MCS poster. As we all know, MCS is not an allergy, it does not have any of the physiological markers of an allergy. But that criticism aside, this poster rocks. I especially love the part where it says, “Patient is not a Fragrance Crash Test Dummy. Don’t just ‘come & see if it affects the patient.’”
Continue Reading
MCS groups in Spain to meet with Secretary of Health
Posted on Jan 26, 2010 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, Government Regulation, MCS, Policy, Social Justice, Susie Collins
A coalition of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Groups in Spain will meet with the Secretary General of the Ministry of Health to discuss formal recognition of MCS.
Eva Caballé at NO FUN reports that a coalition of MCS groups in Spain will meet with the Secretary of the Ministry of Health on Feb. 4 to discuss the formal recognition of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity as a physical illness. The groups also will ask that all people with MCS have the same rights as the other chronically ill people.
The meeting will be held on February 4th 2010 in the Ministry of Health. Mr José Martínez Olmos, Secretary General of the Ministry of Health and Mr Alberto Infante Campos, General Director of Professional Planning, Cohesion of SNS and High Inspection will attend to the meeting representing the Ministry of Health. Following the Ministry of Health instructions, one person by each MCS Association will attend to the meeting and a lawyer and a doctor specialized in MCS too.
David Palma is coordinating this process selflessly.
We are now working on petitions document that will be signed by all MCS associations. This document will be given to the Ministry during the meeting, along with medical information about MCS.
List of MCS associations that are part of this process:
* ACAF
* AFCISQUIM
* Alas de Mariposa
* ALTEA – SQM
* APQUIRA
* ASQUIFYDE
* AVASFASEM-AVASQ
* ENA
* MERCURIADOS
* PLATAFORMA PARA LA FM ,SFC, SQM, reivindicación de derechos, Asociación Nacional
Link to read more about Eva’s book.
Link to read about Eva’s essay in Delirio’s “Silence” issue.
Link to read about Eva’s essay in Delirio’s “Naked” issue.
Continue Reading
Canadian teacher fights for her right to workplace accommodations
Posted on Jan 07, 2010 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, MCS, Worker's Rights
“The battles for those of us with disabilities, and especially for those of us with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, are huge.”
Elaine Willis reports on her blog about Arbitration: Final Day… just waiting for a decision. Elaine has been in a lawsuit for years about workplace accommodations: SCHOOL DISTRICT 36 vs BC TEACHERS’ FEDERATION, ELAINE WILLIS, DUTY TO ACCOMMODATE, which will set precedent in Canadian arbitration law.
The battles for those of us with disabilities, and especially for those of us with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, are huge. There are many false beliefs about our abilities and the nature of our disabilities. The truth remains that we are people, to be treated as all people, with dignity, equality and respect. We are not to be shut away in our homes as society continues to demand of us.
Education is enlightenment. I WILL CONTINUE TO BE A TEACHER! This process may enable me to do so for a living as well!
Here’s the statement Elaine read in court during the second day of arbitration back in August: I AM a teacher.
Brava, Elaine, for your warrior spirit and sense of what’s right! We are proud to have you as one of the flock.
Photo used with Elaine’s permission.
Continue Reading
Environmental illness and disability law proposed in Italy
Posted on Dec 27, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, Government Regulation, MCS, Policy, Social Justice, Susie Collins, Worker's Rights
Silvia Müller at the Chemical Sensitivity Network wrote to tell me there’s an Italian law proposal for environmental illnesses and disability. The proposed law includes definitions of various environmental illnesses such as Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and Electromagnetic Sensitivity, diagnosis and prevention guidelines, guidelines for health care professionals, building and planning rules, employment protections, and financial coverage.
This is really good news. We are seeing country after country enact these types of laws, most recently Germany and Japan. Getting these laws enforced is another story, but we should still celebrate this forward momentum toward global recognition of environmental illnesses, moving us closer to full rights given to those who need medical care, safe housing, financial, and other support.
MeP DOMENICO SCILIPOTI (IDV): “HOW TO HELP PEOPLE AFFECTED BY ENVIRONMENTAL DISABILITY”
PRESS RELEASE, Rome 21.dec.09
“In order to help people with Environmental Disabilities whose survival and quality of life depend not on drugs, but on avoiding certain environmental factors, today I presented a project of law about this issue”, comments On. Scilipoti. “The law is meant for environmentally triggered diseases such as Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS), involving a loss of tolerance of chemicals, or Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS), forcing the affected ones to get far from electromagnetic fields emitted by mobiles, Wi-Fi, electric cables, etc. But the law is also meant for genetic, metabolic, neurological or immunological disorders such as fibromyalgia or CFS (involving chemical intolerances) or favism, which gives serious reactions to legumes. Other cases of environmental disability are seen in autism, epilepsy, migraine and lupus that involve reactions to fluorescent lighting”. “It’s important to discuss this law as soon as possible in order to give an answer to these people”, Scilipoti concludes.
Link to read entire law proposal.
Thanks, Silvia!
Continue Reading
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and Social Security Disability, Part 7
Posted on Nov 16, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, MCS, Michael Walkup
There are many pitfalls for people with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity applying for Social Security Disability Insurance. I recommend that MCS clients get in touch with me before they make the Social Security Disability Insurance application, or maybe even while they are still working and trying to get accommodations from their employers.
Post by Michael Walkup, attorney at law.
This is the last part of a series on disability law as it relates to MCS claims.
Representation on your claim
One question people with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity always have is whether or not to retain a representative on their Social Security Disability Insurance claim, and, if so, when in the process is the best time to do this. They may also want to know if it is best to get an attorney or a non attorney, and if they should hire someone in their immediate area or someone from a national firm.
Anyone is allowed to serve as a representative in a Social Security Disability Insurance claim. Only attorneys and those representatives who are certified by the Social Security Administration can get direct payment of their fees, however. Others have to be paid directly by the client. Attorneys are automatically allowed to both represent claimants before SSA and to obtain direct payment of fees. Other people who wish to have withholding and direct payment of fees have to take a national test and be certified by SSA.
Attorneys can practice before SSA in all 50 states so long as they are a member of the bar in any one state. Other representatives can likewise practice in any state.
One advantage of hiring an attorney rather than a non attorney is accountability for malpractice. Attorneys will generally have malpractice insurance, and this can be verified by checking with the bar association that registers attorneys in the state or states in which they are licensed. Non attorneys have no such insurance.
Another advantage of an attorney is the training they receive in the practice of law, which is readily transferable to SSDI claims, and their years of experience in the court systems. There are no training programs as such for non attorney representatives, although some of them are trained as vocational experts, nurses, paralegals, insurance claim representatives, etc.
If you do hire anyone, be sure that you find out exactly what their experience is in Social Security disability claims, and possibly in the area of your particular impairments as well. When it comes to MCS, most attorneys, even those who specialize in disability claims, often have little experience.
My website, www.MCSLegalHelp.com, contains a list of “Ten Questions To Ask Your Lawyer,” which can give you further guidance.
When to get a representative
Continue Reading
A story about discrimination and Multiple Chemical Sensitivity
Posted on Nov 03, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, Guest Bloggers, MCS, Social Justice
I have learned not to apologize for asking for the simple right to raise my health issue when looking for safe housing.
By Guest Blogger Missy Gluckmann.
Living with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity can be a challenge, sometimes more so than others. We know that it can also be incredibly inconvenient– having to duck and weave like Muhammad Ali when you are presented with a chemical that wants to take you down. MCS can send you to bed, even to the hospital. But this past weekend, MCS hurt the most when I realized that I was being discriminated against because of it.
While in the process of selling my house, my boyfriend Tony (who is incredibly supportive and sensitive of my MCS) and I have been diligently looking for an apartment in a new community. Which community was not the issue; we found a lovely town north of the city that would meet both of our needs beautifully. The apartment, however, is a bit more tricky. We all know the list: wood floors, good ventilation, no signs of water damage, more recent construction, no basements, not recently painted, away from parking lots/auto repair shops/dry cleaners– anything that can spew an obvious toxic chemical our way. Tony and I found what we thought was a perfect place: a 1st floor apartment with wood floors in a beautifully renovated building. We began negotiations for the rent and lease terms, determined an amount and were told that the lease would be drafted this week. We were even willing to pay a significant finder’s fee for this place as it appeared to be “MCS friendly.”
While packing on Saturday and preparing to move to a temporary apartment for one month while the owners of the co-op we’d be renting found their new apartment, we received a call from the agent. I heard Tony on the phone exclaim loudly, “What?!? You’re kidding me!” It was Halloween after all– perhaps whatever she said was some sort of ghoulish joke. It wasn’t. We were not going to be able to take the apartment after all. Why? Apparently because I had asked the agent to have the owner consider giving us a three month escape clause in the event that something in the apartment seriously threatened my health– and, unfortunately, I could not know if that would be the case until I lived there. I had thought about it the previous week– one possible issue with this apartment is that there was a common laundry room in the basement and we were on the first floor. Would I be smelling those evil dryer sheets daily? Would I be feeling the laundry room chemicals as I slept? Would I be sick again, possibly for weeks, because I didn’t ask a hard question?
Now, having been a landlord, I realize that owners have a mortgage obligation. I was not asking these people to consider my request as a last minute deal breaker– we would have taken the apartment because we had generally done our homework and we thought it would be fine. Other apartments that we have taken have been fine, and I told them this with my written request. I explained MCS and stated that obviously I would not want to have to move because of my illness– and that while I didn’t anticipate anything happening with the apartment, I did have an obligation to pose the question because health comes before a mortgage payment. I indicated that if I did feel unwell that we would give three months notice and provide a detailed letter from an environmental medicine MD to confirm that I was not just being difficult. I emphasized that Tony and I had carefully selected the apartment based on my MCS needs and that we did not anticipate any issues and certainly wouldn’t take a request to move lightly as it would result in stress on my health, loss of a significant agent finder’s fee, moving costs, etc.
When the agent called us yesterday, she essentially said they don’t want to take a risk on me because of my health. They did not say, “No, we cannot commit to an escape clause.” We would have signed a lease regardless as we really believed the apartment would be fine– and as you know, if you live with MCS, you learn to live dodging bullets all day long. Yesterday was the first time that someone directly told me that my health was going to be cause for denying me access to an apartment. I felt like I was slapped in the face, hard. Tony and I told them, as politely as possible, what to do with their apartment and quickly scrambled to cancel our mover the next day, find a new apartment, cancel our temporary housing (which we had just paid in cash that morning!), sell furniture that we thought we would need and now no longer do need for the newer, but smaller space. It was a very good exercise in going with the flow and responding to the challenges of MCS.
Now, could I get a lawyer and make a big MCS stink about it? Yes, sure I could. Will I? No. I took the high road and quickly decided two things that would reflect how I want to live this life. I chose to send an email to educate the agent (and hopefully, therefore, the owners) about how their decision impacted many people and how their lack of communication about any concern caused incredible stress and financial burden to us. But most importantly, I thought of sharing this story with The Canary Report. Why? Because in my email to the agent I reiterated the following: “I have learned not to apologize for asking for the simple right to raise my health issue and that remains the case.” And today I got a lovely email back from the agent, thanking me for my note and apologizing for her client’s poor decision. I was true to myself and stayed an educator, which MCS cannot take away from me.
Canaries, I hope you all remember that you should NEVER EVER apologize for asking hard questions. If the world isn’t ready for them, too bad. Our health and our needs come first, and we will not be silenced. KEEP CHIRPING whether the world is ready for us or not!
~
Related Posts:
Toxic mold found at Rockland Community College
A message from Missy Gluckmann: The fox is watching the hen house
Missy kicks ass, forces former employer to fix sick building
Continue Reading
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and Social Security Disability, Part 6
Posted on Oct 21, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, MCS, Michael Walkup
In addition to or instead of benefits under Social Security Disability Insurance or Title II of the Social Security Act, you may be entitled to Supplementary Security Income benefits.
Post by Michael Walkup, attorney at law.
In my last column, I discussed circumstances of re-filing your Social Security Disability Insurance application at the time of taking an Appeals Council appeal, while still pursuing that appeal. Let me talk a bit more about re-filing for SSDI, and then also discuss Supplementary Security Income in relation to SSDI and Medicaid.
Re-Opening Claim for SSDI
Again, as I have discussed in previously, many Multiple Chemical Sensitivity sufferers have older applications that they did not appeal or tried to return to work and dropped their claims. In some circumstances, these earlier applications can be reopened. If you file a new application for benefits, it’s considered a constructive request to re-open any prior claims. If you re-file within one year of the Initial Denial decision, the claim is automatically re-opened. The prior claims can also be re-opened if a new application is filed within four years of the Initial Denial and you submit new and material evidence that was not available at the time of the original application or was not obtained and used in the decision. You can also re-open at any time if there is a severe mental impairment, which prevented you from acting in your own behalf.
The advantage of re-opening is that all of the benefits which had accrued during the original application can be obtained if you are successful, not just the ones that accrue after filing the new application. This can mean a fairly large award can be obtained.
Bear in mind that the time is calculated from the first denial letter you received on your claim, not the Administrative Law Judge decision or Appeals Council decision.
Supplementary Security Income
In addition to or instead of benefits under SSDI or Title II of the Social Security Act, you may be entitled to Supplementary Security Income benefits, or SSI.
SSI is basically a welfare program and allows people who are disabled and also are poor enough to fall under the federal poverty guidelines, to receive benefits if they are unable to work. People over 65 who do not have other income or resources automatically get SSI.
An important difference between the SSI benefits and the SSDI program is that for SSI you do not have to have enough “current credits” in covered employment or to ever have had a work history. This can be an advantage to those people who may only have worked a short time, or were homemakers for many years before becoming disabled, or who did a lot of part time work or work in which they were paid in cash or were self employed and did not pay taxes.
However, to get SSI benefits, you have to also be poor enough, which tends to preclude people who are married with working spouses. Also, if you are receiving “in kind” support, such as having your rent covered by a friend or relative, it will reduce the amount you may receive.
Another advantage of the SSI benefits is that there is no “waiting period” between the time you became disabled and first month in which benefits can be paid. However, there is also no payment for retroactive benefits prior to the month in which the SSI application is made, whereas with SSDI you can get retroactive benefits for up to a year before the month in which you applied.
Medicaid is available if you are approved for SSI but not Medicare.
If your SSDI monthly payment is less than the current SSI monthly amount, you can receive enough SSI in combination with the SSDI to bring you up to the SSI payment if you otherwise qualify.
To be continued.
Link to all columns by Michael Walkup.
###
This series on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and disability rights is written by Michael Walkup, attorney at law.
Michael is an experienced disability practitioner with more than 25 years experience in the disability law field. In 2001, he became disabled due to Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS), Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) and Fibromyalgia Syndrome (FMS). He now provides a service to advise clients with potential disability claims who have MCS, CFS and/or FMS. As these programs and law are usually federal, he is able to practice in all 50 states and, therefore, represent clients regardless of location.
Michael is a long time Sustaining Member of the National Organization for Social Security Claimants’ Representatives, the only national body for disability representatives. He is also certified as a Federal Trial Lawyer and is admitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veteran’s Claims.
Michael would welcome the opportunity to possibly help with disability claims. For more information, visit his website MCS Legal Help at walkuplaw.com. Contact info: email MJWalkup@Amertech.net or call 866-880-4878.
Continue Reading
Documentary film: Allergic to the 21st Century
Posted on Oct 02, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, MCS, Media/Videos, Susie Collins
Videos: Documentary on Electromagnetic Sensitivity and Multiple Chemical Sensitivity made for United Kingdom’s Channel-4.
“Allergic to the 21st Century” is produced and directed by Anne-Claire Pilley and features Sarah Dacre (at left), Roger Moller and Adrian Gray.
Continue Reading
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and Social Security Disability, Part 5
Posted on Sep 26, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, MCS, Michael Walkup
Appeals: You can estimate that it will take at least a year for the Appeals Council to render a decision.
Post by Michael Walkup, attorney at law.
Although each stage of the Social Security Disability process can be called an “appeal,” what I will be talking about here are appeals from adverse decisions following a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ).
An adverse ALJ decision will be called an “Unfavorable Decision.” You may also appeal a “Partially Favorable Decision,” which will be a decision in which you were awarded some, but not all, of the benefits you were seeking. If you won entirely, it will be called a “Fully Favorable Decision.” You cannot appeal a Fully Favorable Decision even if you don’t like the rationale that was used to award the benefits, e.g. mental impairment.
You have 60 days to appeal an adverse decision which is done by filling out a form and sending it to the Hearings Office. The entire file, including the decision and a disc of the hearing testimony, will be sent to the Appeals Council in Baltimore, Maryland. You can send in additional evidence and make additional arguments, which again are done in writing only, to the Appeals Council.
You can estimate that it will take at least a year for the Appeals Council to render a decision. You can keep updating your file and adding evidence while that is going on. The average amount of time the person reviewing your file will spend on your case for the review is about fifteen minutes, so keep any comments short and to the point.
To the extent that anything favorable happens at the Appeals Council it will be probably be to remand the case back for an additional hearing with instructions to the ALJ rather than an outright reversal. The exception to this would be if there is some definitive evidence of a non Multiple Chemical Sensitivity condition which is disabling, such as bi polar disorder, for example, that was not raised before, or some definitive testing. This will not tend to apply in MCS cases, so you should at best look forward to a remand for an additional hearing. The remand hearing will be in front of the same judge as denied the claim originally, unless you move out of that Hearing Office’s area, in which case it will be transferred to the new office and re-assigned to a different judge. Your chances will be better if you can get the remand heard by someone new, “hint hint.”
If you lose at the Appeals Council, you can file a lawsuit against the Social Security Administration in the Federal District Court for your area. These are again decided entirely on paper with briefs submitted by both sides. A transcript has to be prepared of the hearing testimony. If the audio disc is not audible, the case will be remanded for a new hearing automatically.
Federal court cases are difficult in MCS claims as the federal courts tend to follow more restrictive rules of evidence for admission of expert testimony. Even though there are no rules of evidence in Social Security Disability cases, I find that these rules tend to influence the thinking of the federal judges nevertheless, making it difficult to convince them to accept what may be considered non-standard tests and opinions. The decision from any federal appeal also will be published nationally, so it can create a bad precedent for others. I therefore tend to discourage federal court appeals in favor of advising my clients to re-file for benefits, where possible.
You may re-file your application at the time of taking the Appeals Council appeal, while still pursuing that appeal. As the Appeals Council will take a year or more to decide your appeal, and, at best, will probably be sending it back for another ALJ hearing, which will take time to schedule, the amount of time it will take on an entirely new application may not be that much different. Also, even if you are still living in the same area, the new application will be assigned randomly to one of six or more ALJ’s in that Hearing Office, so the chances are that you will be assigned a different judge than the one that denied the previous claim.
The exception to this is if your “Date Last Insured” for disability benefits had expired before the date of the ALJ Decision. In that case, you will not be able to re-file a new application and will have to take all available appeals.
I will talk about that more in the next installment.
To be continued.
Link to all columns by Michael Walkup.
###
This series on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and disability rights is written by Michael Walkup, attorney at law.
Michael is an experienced disability practitioner with more than 25 years experience in the disability law field. In 2001, he became disabled due to Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS), Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) and Fibromyalgia Syndrome (FMS). He now provides a service to advise clients with potential disability claims who have MCS, CFS and/or FMS. As these programs and law are usually federal, he is able to practice in all 50 states and, therefore, represent clients regardless of location.
Michael is a long time Sustaining Member of the National Organization for Social Security Claimants’ Representatives, the only national body for disability representatives. He is also certified as a Federal Trial Lawyer and is admitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veteran’s Claims.
Michael would welcome the opportunity to possibly help with disability claims. For more information, visit his website MCS Legal Help at walkuplaw.com. Contact info: email MJWalkup@Amertech.net or call 866-880-4878.
Continue Reading
Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and Social Security Disability, Part 4
Posted on Sep 24, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, MCS, Michael Walkup
The Zen of the hearing.
Post by Michael Walkup, attorney at law.
This is Part 4 on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and Social Security Disability.
Trying to figure out how to handle a disability hearing for someone with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity is tricky. The usual approaches may not work.
I have found that the outcome of these types of cases is heavily dependent on the underlying attitude of the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), and the vocational experts (VE) and medical experts (ME).
My clients are all clearly unable to do any type of work due to their impairments, as they describe them. If I think there may be some type of job they can do, I don’t take the case. They also tend to have very similar sets of sensitivities in that they are particularly sensitive to artificial fragrances. That alone makes them unable to function in a work environment where they will be around other people whose habits they can’t control. Usually they have left office types of jobs after numerous attempts to obtain accommodations from their employers and voluntary cooperation from co-workers.
There are usually a host of other sensitivities such as to cleaning products, herbicides, artificial materials used in decorating and construction, oil based fuels, plastics, electromagnetic frequencies, vibrations, paper and ink, etc., which further seal the deal.
Nevertheless, you do run into judges and experts who don’t “get it” and try to either say that the condition doesn’t exist, and/or that it is a mental impairment. If the mental impairment is judged to be serious enough, you can win on that basis, but they may feel that it is not that severe because they use the criteria used to judge other mental conditions like depression, anxiety, bi-polar, etc., and you don’t meet those. What to do?
Since I do cases all over the country, I usually don’t know anything about the judge going in. I therefore present the case the same way each time, which is to do the following:
(1) I make sure that my client is going for regular treatment right up to the date of the hearing with an environmental doctor of some sort who will do testing and write a favorable report, and possibly testify by telephone.
(2) I try to keep my client from going into situations that might be used to argue that she/he does not have a problem, such as going shopping, to church, and to doctor’s offices who are not environmental specialists. This includes having them refuse to go to examinations by Social Security doctors unless special arrangements can be made, and by having them insist on attending the hearing by telephone rather than in person or at a video conference site. This is assuming, of course, that there is a real sensitivity present that would make those appearances problematic. Often, the actual reactions are delayed so the client’s difficulties are not apparent during the event, which is one reason I like to try to keep my clients out of the situation entirely as the later reaction will often not be witnessed.
(3) I may refer them for testing with specialists who work with MCS patients on a regular basis in addition to their treating doctors.
(4) I try to prevent them from filing for disability insurance, workers compensation, or personal injury claims, which will cause them to be scheduled to go to examinations by unfriendly doctors who will generate reports. If they have already done so, I try to keep those reports out of the Social Security file or insist that I be allowed to cross examine any outside experts. (Since there is no provision in the Social Security Act to do this, it can be difficult and requires that the report not have been previously sent to Social Security so they have to issue a subpoena for it after a hearing.)
(5) I try to get one or more national experts on chemical sensitivity, who did not treat my client, to testify by telephone. I also submit synopses of the current state of research into MCS, such as recent studies by Canada and Australia, as well as the new ICU 10 Rules in Germany which recognize MCS and eliminated prior references to somatoform disorder for MCS.
(6) I try to emphasize that MCS is probably not an “allergy” as traditionally thought, but is more probably some type of disorder of the central nervous system in which the nerve and brain cells have become hypersensitive to minute amounts of chemicals and overreact when molecules of those chemicals enter the cells. This is not really a part of how medicine is practiced to date, including allergy medicine and neurology, and is more a question of biochemistry or molecular biology in which the experts used by Social Security are usually not well versed.
(7) I usually limit the cross examination of any experts called by Social Security to bring out that they do not have much, or any, direct experience in the treatment of MCS nor have they attended any seminars or read any articles on the subject. I then contrast their lack of experience with that of the experts I have called.
In other words, “Less is More.”
(8) I get the vocational expert to admit that if my client would have to leave work more than once or twice in a month throughout the year, there would be no jobs that would be considered to be available, and that it would be impossible to police all of the chemicals which would cause that sort of reaction, particularly chemical fragrances in a workplace situation that the worker could not control.
Hearings do not generally provide you with much time to get into extensive cross examinations of experts and I find that trying to do that not only usually lands you in trouble, but gives the illusion that “you had a chance to cross examine the witness,” when you were really being rushed along by the judge who had only allocated one hour total for the entire hearing including the testimony of the claimant and the claimant’s witnesses. It is very rare to score any points with an expert on cross examination in their area of expertise even when you have the benefit of pre-trial depositions and discovery, neither of which you have in a Social Security hearing.
By and large I have found this approach to be successful, and have won about 75% of my MCS cases overall. This compares favorably with the more general rate of success for non MCS cases on a national level. On those cases that we lose, we consider further appeals or a re-filing, or both. More on that next time.
To be continued.
Link to all columns by Michael Walkup.
###
This series on Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and disability rights is written by Michael Walkup, attorney at law.
Michael is an experienced disability practitioner with more than 25 years experience in the disability law field. In 2001, he became disabled due to Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS), Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) and Fibromyalgia Syndrome (FMS). He now provides a service to advise clients with potential disability claims who have MCS, CFS and/or FMS. As these programs and law are usually federal, he is able to practice in all 50 states and, therefore, represent clients regardless of location.
Michael is a long time Sustaining Member of the National Organization for Social Security Claimants’ Representatives, the only national body for disability representatives. He is also certified as a Federal Trial Lawyer and is admitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veteran’s Claims.
Michael would welcome the opportunity to possibly help with disability claims. For more information, visit his website MCS Legal Help at walkuplaw.com. Contact info: email MJWalkup@Amertech.net or call 866-880-4878.
Continue Reading
Potter with chemical sensitivity goes through the fire
Posted on Jul 29, 2009 by Susie Collins in Blog, Disability Rights, MCS, Media/Videos, Susie Collins, Worker's Rights
Raku, a Japanese pottery technique, creates a thermal shock in the kiln that will either destroy the work or make it into something amazing.
Post by Susie Collins.
Amy Pratt was unable to throw pottery for close to a year due to injuries caused to her chest wall by coughing too hard and for too long from exposure to toxic chemicals. The chemical exposures she endured at work, coupled with myriad things they were doing to her body, stopped her from doing much of anything for a long time.
“My hiccups and vocal tics were getting worse with activity,” Amy says. “The hand and arm spasms make throwing very challenging.”
But it didn’t stop her completely. Like her pottery in the kiln, Amy burned through the worst of it and is back at her craft making balls and rattles.
“It started out as something to do to practice different texture, firing, and glaze techniques,” she says. “I wanted to try to do something repetitive, to see how I could improve my skills or see how long before I got really bored from it.
“I am now planning to make fountains or some kind of outdoor sculptures out of them.”
Amy is practicing her craft in the studio at the school where she used to work. She started throwing there last spring, before she was asked to leave her job of nine years.
Amy, in her early 40s, has been throwing since she was eight years old, during her first trip to summer camp. She says she didn’t have anyone show her how to do it, she just “went at it,” sometimes spinning art across the room.
“I was able to center, and make something close to a small bowl,” she says. “There is something magical, something primal about taking a lump of clay and creating something with it.”
Amy’s first clue she had Multiple Chemical Sensitivity came in 1997 when she had two isolated exposures from which she completely recovered.
But in 2001, she was leveled by an exposure to lacquer oil, and she almost lost her job because she was too down at work and too ill for close to a year. In 2005, she was again knocked out by paints, carpet and glues, and was out of work for five months. By late 2006, she was experiencing exposures almost daily, which, when coupled with a back injury, led to further complications. She filed a total of six worker compensation claims in three years. She’s now fighting for a disability claim.
“I am often asked, ‘Why do ceramics, why expose yourself to more chemicals and dust?’” Amy says. “Why? Because it keeps me sane.”
Amy says the studio where she throws is very proactive with keeping clay dust down to a minimum, and she avoids using the glaze room when the sprayer is being used.
“I wouldn’t be able to do anything there if I didn’t have the support of the people who run the place,” she says.
So far, the worst exposures at the studio have been fumes from glues, hand lotions and perfumes. There has only been a few times when she could not enter the kiln yard due to something bothering her.
“Throwing helps me cope by getting out and being with other people,” Amy says.
She describes Raku, the Japanese pottery technique she uses, as creating thermal shock that will either destroy the work or make it into something amazing. “You have to let go and see what happens, there is only a small amount of control,” she explains. “Clay can take a lot of abuse, as long as you don’t drop it.”
The analogy of Raku to life with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity is unmistakable.
“When I finish my self portrait, I plan on raku-ing it, using all of the boxes of paperwork generated from my claims to be burned in the process,” she says. “Fire, good.”
Photos by Amy Pratt.
You can view more of Amy’s pottery on her photo page at The Canary Report’s social network.
Continue Reading
Welcome to The Canary Report!
The Canary Report is a blog and social network about Multiple Chemical Sensitivity.
We compassionately bring you unfiltered and uncensored news and information you can trust directly from the source: people who have MCS. Dedicated to sharing, supporting, and inspiring with the Aloha Spirit, The Canary Report gives all canaries a voice. Come join us!
Aloha,
Susie Collins
Founder and Contributing Editor
Hilo, Hawaii
Let’s Connect on the Social Web
-
Why I boycott Breast Cancer Awareness Month
-
The Canary Report releases its 2010 wall calendar
-
The false promise of miracle cures for Multiple Chemical Sensitivity
-
Warning: Avoid ozone generating air machines
-
The dangers of aroma technology
-
A statement from Lourdes Salvador about recent ad hominem attacks on Facebook
-
DIY: Skip the chemicals, get a buzz
-
The naked truth about Multiple Chemical Sensitivity
-
Perfume blogger dismisses concerns from a member of our community
-
International Multiple Chemical Sensitivity awareness project is launched
-
Jasmine: I can't believe that guy just lit his running fauc...
-
Amy: Thanks Natasha, I haven't been able to Raku or th...
-
celia: I should say, though, that if you have a poor seal...
-
-
-
Natasha Hodgson: Lovely work amy ,I love raku.I too am a clay sculp...
-
Susan E.: You're writing about logic proofs again, Susie. I ...
-
Airy: Gosh, what a wonderful story. It's tough to give u...
-
lois morris: Thanks David,I'm recommending your site to a few o...
-
Susie Collins: IH Man, I'll ignore the mean-spirited intentio...