Articles from prior issues of The Advocate

July/August, 1998

NADE Correspondence

May 8, 1998

The Honorable Kenneth S. Apfel
Commissioner of Social Security
PO Box 1585
Baltimore, MD 21235

Dear Commissioner Apfel:

The National Association of Disability Examiners (NADE) does not support the proposal to delete obesity from the medical listings. While it is true that some individuals who meet this listing may have sufficient residual functional capacities to work, the same could be said for most, if not all, of the listings.

Obesity at the listing level imposes mechanical and exertional challenges for most people. The listing describes “morbid” obesity and its effects. The second impairments listed in subsections B through E are not what impose disability but rather demonstrate: a) the pathological effect of the claimant’s weight; and b) its chronicity. That is, the weight is harmful to the individual’s health, and has been long-standing enough to do damage. It is not reasonable to delete this listing simply on the basis that some individuals are able to work.

For SSA to consider obesity as a disabling impairment which justified a separate listing for so long, and now to conclude that this is not the case, would only invite additional litigation against the agency—litigation which would be costly and time-consuming. This litigation would also invite public skepticism of SSA’s actions and diminish public support for the disability program at a time when maintaining this support and insuring the integrity of the program is a top priority of the Agency. NADE believes the proposal to eliminate the Obesity Listing is counterproductive to achieving this goal.

If research has shown that this listing does not reflect a level of severity consistent with the Social Security Act, we believe it would be more appropriate to revise, rather than delete, it. Furthermore, NADE would encourage publication of all research material supporting SSA’s change in policy regarding obesity.

Individuals applying for disability benefits must be viewed as just that -- as individuals. NADE does not support taking a “cookie cutter” approach to disability evaluation. We do, however, support consistency in the adjudication process. The listings are designed to promote that consistency. Eliminating the Obesity Listing and adjudicating all claims involving obesity on a “case by case” basis would almost certainly result in inconsistency in decisions between the states, the regions, and perhaps most significantly, between the State Agencies and the Administrative Law Judges. For this reason we urge that obesity not be deleted from the medical listings.

Thank you for your consideration of our comments.

Sincerely,

Debi Gardiner
NADE President