This is the continuation of the prior blog about being disabled without the benefits of Social Security commonly called SSDI, Social Security Disability Insurance. Now I will attempt to enlarge your knowledge of the the problems the disabled encounter by relating some of my personal experiences and knowledge acquired from other disabled people. Obviously, I have encountered many personal problems. Many were before my divorce, but since then they have become much more complex.
Before my divorce, I was a middle classed housewife who really did not need to find a job or face the problems I had encountered in the working world when I did work. Before the divorce I had brain surgery for essential tremors in a procedure called a thalamotomy. The procedure made it where I did not have to hire someone to feed me. The procedure did not cure all the problems of essential tremors, ET, but it helped a lot. However, in the eyes of the working world, it was still very apparent that I have a severe problem. The stress of being part of the working world makes the tremor more of a problem. I tried to find a job and soon became discouraged with the response. I was in my late fifties and that in its self was a problem in the workforce. I have office skills and have worked at various types of jobs in my life. I am not a fast worker, but tend to be meticulous. I have always had to deal with shaking hands, a tremulous voice and head. It has been shown in an EEG that I have slightly delayed reactions and an eye tremor. Fluorescent lights tire my eyes out. My reactions tend to put me in harm's way more than the average person and I will get hurt before most people will. This does not keep me from driving car but it does tend to make me far more cautious than normal people. So far in my life, I have never had a ticket or caused an accident involving any one but me. I usually make a great first impression but when scrutinized an employer tends to believe there is more wrong than meets the eye regardless of what I tell them. All people tend to believe what they see, not what they are told. Unfortunately, most prospective employers appear to find reasons why they do not think it will work.
It does not matter what the law in regards to the disabled says that I do not have to reveal my handicap, they can obviously see mine. Even if it does not require that an employer provide any handicap accessibility or special equipment or adjustments to the workplace they hesitate to hire me. In some ways employers fear me because they do not understand my disability and are not sure how to deal with me. It truly does not matter if I can do the job they require or not. Given a choice between me and the normal person, they will not hire me.
Regardless of the rules from social security, they cannot force employers to hire the handicapped. Regardless of social security and their view of the disabled, if I am able to work and still cannot get hired, I guess I and people like me are supposed to go without any income even if we have earned a wage at sometime in the past.
Unfortunately, today the law about age discrimination has very little bite behind it. For people like me and other people I know with disabilities, who have reached the over forty years old mark and beyond, the lesson in age discrimination has also been very painful. Let me relate a story about a friend who suffered age discrimination.
He had been employed by a major telecommunication company and moved to a location for employment. He filled all the requirements they told him he had to pass in the pre-employment requirements. He was not there even three months before they changed their minds about what was required for the job and sent him to a pole climbing class. The actual job was not one that appeared to require that and most of the jobs being done at the time were done using equipment called a cherry picker. When he got to he class there were a variety of people and ages attending the class. Right off the bat, the climbing equipment did not fit him and put him a day behind everyone else in the class until the proper gear could be acquired. He had to pay all his own expenses to attend the class. Three days into the class, he got up to go to his company vehicle in the motel parking lot and found it had been vandalized. Of course, he had to call the police and miss most of the class to take care of the incident. Now that meant two days that he had been unable to participate in the class. He called his supervisor and was told it was not important right now and to return to his job site and he could retake the class in about nine months. So he did. A week later he was called in by his supervisor and dismissed for the job for not passing the class. With all the expenses out of his personal pocket including a relocation, he was blown away and extremely upset. He called the state labor department and launched a complaint. It took him a few days to find out that several who failed the class who were under forty years of age had been retained and all those who failed who were over forty had been dismissed. Since he had worked in the field before and been certified in pole climbing with another affiliated company the union stepped in and said he should have never been dismissed or required to take the class. All said and done, nothing happened to re secure the job. He was given permission to sue the corporation for age discrimination by the state labor department. The real rub comes from the fact that a five hundred thousand dollars in a law suit is not sufficient to obtain legal representation. No lawyer was found who was willing to represent him on a contingency basis because as one of them finally told him, corporate attorneys regardless of whether he won the case or not, could tie him up in court until there was not a dime left to pay for the case. This is an amazing but true story. Hard to believe that to a corporation paying their attorney's an a hundred thousand dollar fee is cheaper than paying an employee half a million. Employees are just numbers and dollars to a corporation the size of the one he would have to fight. He dropped the case and moved on. Unfortunately, his case speaks loudly of how corporations view their employees. Many ex-employees commit suicide over these kinds of practices.
As a disabled person, if you are hired by a large corporation, be prepared to be disappointed. It does not always happen but in enough cases they will discover your disability if you have not told them, and before the probation period ends they will find ways to end the relationship. They will not refuse to hire you because that would violate the law but they will find excuses that are legitimate to end your employment. Many times they will find the requirements are different than originally presented and you do not fulfill the requirements. I do not know about all disabilities but I have seen people with Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity (ADHD), bipolar condition and epilepsy who have had it happen to them. All of these are invisible disabilities but disabilities none the less. Many time regardless of their claim of privacy in regards to group insurance, just filling out the enrollment card can disclose to much about any disabilities. Many of my disabled friends have experienced less compassion for their disability than a single parent seeking the same job. Honestly, most employers are only concerned about what they get from your employment and could care less if you are trying to survive in a world of problems and challenges. Personally, I have always found it best to keep my personal life apart from my employment to the maximum I can maintain. I try not to mention anything personal on the job including anything regarding health including today's headache. I definitely attempt to stay away from office gossip in any form.
Most employers I have encountered over the years tell you they are "family oriented" and concerned about the happiness of the employees. I perceive that as an untrue statement and made only to make you "feel good," appreciative and enthusiastic about the job. As a disabled person those words have a hollow ring. If your disability is episodic and requires time off of work for a doctor's appointment on any kind of regular basis during work hours, whether you are paid for the time or not, be prepared to be unemployed. Any disabled person can tell you that if they have to go to a specialist for their disability the appointment will probably take longer than normal time away from work for testing or changes in medications.
Let me tell you the story of family who were suddenly thrown into the world of disability. They were in a head-on collision due to no fault of their own. Insurance should have taken care of most of the injuries, but that was not the case. The person who hit them did not have insurance and the true cause of the accident, a piece of highway equipment without lights traveling after the time they should have been on the highway, could not be located. Both drivers acknowledge the highway equipment but the police could not find the responsible party to share the blame for the accident. The family, let's call them, Victor, Debbie and David, their real names. They were all injured. Victor the main income provider was able to secure SSDI. Debbie his wife, who was disabled prior to the accident with epilepsy, lost her spleen, was head injured and had other injuries. David, the baby, suffered a closed brain injury. To this day, none of them are able to work in the workforce. Debbie who should have received SSI has been denied and the ruling was found to be discriminatory by a higher court. Her lawyer has not been able to find any other judge willing to hear the case even with the discrimination ruling. So since 1989, they have all lived on the insufficient funds received by Victor.
They live in a sub-standard mobile with all three of them sharing one bedroom. David was assessed as never being able to progress beyond the age of ten, but Debbie did not find that acceptable and spent many hours working with him and educating him. Thank goodness nothing has happened to Victor and his disability has not killed him. Their story is so complicated in regards to social security it is ridiculous and it should not have been that way. Thank goodness Debbie did not accept the diagnosis on her son. He has his high school diploma and is trying to acquire some form of higher education. I am sure he will succeed with the support of his family. Without social security their living conditions have left lots to be desired and the money they need over and above Victor's SSDI payments have come from aluminum cans and "dumpster diving." Food banks have helped them. Welfare was not a option because of the social services ruling that they did not need help and all because of social security discrimination that cannot be resolved even though it has been found to be true. They have survived without SSI for Debbie or welfare for all these years and they will continue to survive. Debbie has taken advantage of educational resources and secured an associate degree in the past year and is attempting to secure a bachelor's in education. From her experience with her son, she feels she can help other brain injured children achieve their maximum educational recovery. She would like to open her own educational business after graduation where she will not have to depend on an employer for an income or work hours that aggravate her disability. I pray somehow that will be possible. If she cannot find a way to support herself when Victor dies, which will probably be before to long, she will be supporting herself on almost nothing. Whether her son ever is able to work in a regular work environment remains to be seen. I could write a book about their experiences but it still would not describe fully what this family has endured. The compromises they make on a daily basis would push many people into deep depression and a sense of hopelessness.
The dilemma between telling any employer you are disabled or not telling them results in a hard decision. I know I have told some employers who did not want to hear about my disability and their reason for not hiring me was "a reliability issue" as regards daily attendance. Is that a cute reason for denial of employ- ment? Whether I agree with them or not, or prior jobs indicate it has not been an issue, they believe it will be. I do not know of any employer or employee who has a fortune teller's crystal ball that will determine how much time off a person will need due to illness, disability or family issues. Unfortunately, some of us have more viewable issues than others.
After you have read the social security documents I linked to in Part 1 of this blog, let me refer you to one part specifically. This part pretty much represents the way social security views the matter.
"Social Security pays benefits to people who cannot work because they have a medical condition that is expected to last at least one year or result in death. Federal law requires this very strict definition of disability. While some programs give money to people with partial disability or short-term disability, Social Security does not."
This explains why so many have been denied benefits. Many have not been without and income for a year because of their disability and regardless of what a doctor tells social security, they seem to automatically not consider the disability permanent for at least a year.
I have seen one person with a different arrangement. She is blind and her mother assigned part of her social security benefits to her daughter. Since the girl has never been able to work a job with any permanence her disability payment is the major part of her income. Her vision will never improve and she was born without it. Currently, modern medicine has not been able to change her condition and the arrangement she has with social security based on her mother's benefits is and will always be her major income.
My own story about SSDI is interesting. When my husband asked for a divorce and I had no income of my own, it became necessary to probe the possibility of SSDI as a source of income. I called them and found I did not qualify because of my work history over the prior ten years did not give me enough quarters to secure payments. I do qualify for retirement income but SSDI. SSI would not help me because by divorce decree I could receive an income allocation that would be more than they would pay me. Enough said for me qualifying for SSDI.
Most divorce decrees only allow for spousal maintenance or alimony for a limited number of years which usually is between three to five years. However, when discussing it with my attorney I made sure he understood that part of the grounds for the divorce was based on my being too disabled from my husband's viewpoint. He agreed to the idea that I needed to capitalize on that view during mediation. I was fifty-seven years old with less than ten years before social security full retirement eligibility and a possible sixty-two year early retirement. Early retirement social security would not provide enough income to support me or even come close. I do not know of anyone who can live on four hundred dollars a month and remain independent. Although I have grown children, they have their own families to support.
I had to negotiate an income during the divorce that would carry me until retirement age. If that negotiation had not been found in my favor, I would have lost everything I owned. My husband had a 401K and was also due a retirement benefit from a prior job he had until the corporation where he was employed went into bankruptcy. Thank goodness he made a substantial income and at least I could ask for forty percent of his base income for me. He made substantially more than his base, but that was also one of those unreliable fluctuating sums of money. I based my request on his base yearly income. I do not know how other states deal with divorce, disability or income in regards to the spouse who is not working, but in Colorado we are an equitable state. I do not know all the ins and outs of the meaning of "equitable" but it did help with my divorce settlement. I still made some mistakes.
Divorce mediation is required in Colorado prior to the decree. Some of the things that were involved in mine should be considered by anyone seeking a divorce and especially if they are disabled and may not ever be able to work. I was fortunate that my husband conceded to my status of handicapped because if he had not I would have had to pay a doctor to certify all the things that I know are wrong with me and progressing as I grow older. He also could have contested any status of handicapped and cost both of us more money. I did agree to continue to seek employment, but that has been to no avail.
One of the areas of concern was a 401K and the current debts incurred by both of us. I do not think we handled the 401K properly. My husband should have been the one to pull the funds since he was over fifty-nine years of age and paid off all our debts instead of me. He would have paid less taxes in the long run, but because of his yearly income, he thought it would cost more because of the gross income he would have made. As it was, I ended up receiving almost nothing and would have been wise to have declared bankruptcy in order to have retained the benefit of an additional retirement income. As it is, all of the 401K is gone and most of it to taxes. However, the necessary repairs to the house in which I live, would have never been accomplished without taking it from the 401K.
The biggest adjustment came with a reduced income. None of my household bills at the time of the divorce were reduced and the income as a result of the divorce was short four hundred a month of just meeting the bills. The amount I received was less than one half of what I had to manage the household prior to divorce. Obviously over a years time a substantial amount of the 401K was depleted, and several years later, all of the money from the 401K was gone. In essence I used the majority of the 401K to pay debts that were mutual to us. He was able to maintain his A+ credit rating that way and within a few years after the divorce purchased his own home. Had we declared bankruptcy, that would not have happened.
During the negotiations I did do something that most people never think about. I requested that my husband provide life insurance to cover what I would receive if he were to die between the divorce and retirement time. The mediator thought that was a marvelous idea and more people should think ahead that way. I told her, if he died I would not have any income and would be on the street. That got her attention and she felt I had done her a service in providing her with something she should talk to her clients about in future negotiations.
I made one big mistake that I regret. I did not request he maintain health insurance for me. His group insurance would have permitted that to happen with a court order. COBRA ran out and the price they wanted to cover me was too high to pay. I payed for independent coverage for a time, until the payment became too high again. Now, I do not have coverage. I have recently been told I might have qualified for Medicare under the circumstances but again I would have had to fight for it. It only took one hospital visit for pneumonia for my health insurance provider to change my status to high-risk and price me out of private health coverage. I will not go into the high-risk insurance provided through the state because for all intent and purpose it might as well not be insurance. The cost for the coverage and the deductible is not affordable in any manner.
Thank goodness my divorce decree names my disability in the settlement papers. That was a blessing when one of the creditors tried to garnish my income. Once they found out I received maintenance due to a disability they had to stop per law. If I did not have that in a legal document, I would again have to prove I am disabled at my expense. I am grateful my ex-husband did agree with me and my settlement papers spell out all the problems that seem to keep me from working.
This year I will reach the age to acquire Medicare. From what I know so far, the cost will be affordable.
According to the mediator I did fare better than most disabled people she has worked with and receive more than SSDI would have paid me. It is still a pretty depressing thought when you consider come full social security retirement, again my income will be half of what I receive now. Thank goodness I was raised in a poor frugal family because I have always had a hard time spending money for anything but necessities.
With everything considered, I was able to stay afloat for longer than anyone expected. Last year I finally got a Chapter 7 bankruptcy decree. Now I have to figure how I am going to live on only social security when I retire. The cost of my housing, my mobile home is paid off, the park rent is monthly, and the income I will make does not leave enough to eat. So now, I am investigating other places to live that cost less and still meets my needs.
This story is how I have lived without social security disability insurance payments and how several of my friends have survived. I am not whining just relating how it is and telling you the problems that people face. Thanks for reading and let me know what you think and if you think we as a voting population should strive to change the laws in regards to social security. In part 3 of this blog, I will discuss some solutions to social security income and disability. I do not know of anyone who does not recognize the need for change.
Before my divorce, I was a middle classed housewife who really did not need to find a job or face the problems I had encountered in the working world when I did work. Before the divorce I had brain surgery for essential tremors in a procedure called a thalamotomy. The procedure made it where I did not have to hire someone to feed me. The procedure did not cure all the problems of essential tremors, ET, but it helped a lot. However, in the eyes of the working world, it was still very apparent that I have a severe problem. The stress of being part of the working world makes the tremor more of a problem. I tried to find a job and soon became discouraged with the response. I was in my late fifties and that in its self was a problem in the workforce. I have office skills and have worked at various types of jobs in my life. I am not a fast worker, but tend to be meticulous. I have always had to deal with shaking hands, a tremulous voice and head. It has been shown in an EEG that I have slightly delayed reactions and an eye tremor. Fluorescent lights tire my eyes out. My reactions tend to put me in harm's way more than the average person and I will get hurt before most people will. This does not keep me from driving car but it does tend to make me far more cautious than normal people. So far in my life, I have never had a ticket or caused an accident involving any one but me. I usually make a great first impression but when scrutinized an employer tends to believe there is more wrong than meets the eye regardless of what I tell them. All people tend to believe what they see, not what they are told. Unfortunately, most prospective employers appear to find reasons why they do not think it will work.
It does not matter what the law in regards to the disabled says that I do not have to reveal my handicap, they can obviously see mine. Even if it does not require that an employer provide any handicap accessibility or special equipment or adjustments to the workplace they hesitate to hire me. In some ways employers fear me because they do not understand my disability and are not sure how to deal with me. It truly does not matter if I can do the job they require or not. Given a choice between me and the normal person, they will not hire me.
Regardless of the rules from social security, they cannot force employers to hire the handicapped. Regardless of social security and their view of the disabled, if I am able to work and still cannot get hired, I guess I and people like me are supposed to go without any income even if we have earned a wage at sometime in the past.
Unfortunately, today the law about age discrimination has very little bite behind it. For people like me and other people I know with disabilities, who have reached the over forty years old mark and beyond, the lesson in age discrimination has also been very painful. Let me relate a story about a friend who suffered age discrimination.
He had been employed by a major telecommunication company and moved to a location for employment. He filled all the requirements they told him he had to pass in the pre-employment requirements. He was not there even three months before they changed their minds about what was required for the job and sent him to a pole climbing class. The actual job was not one that appeared to require that and most of the jobs being done at the time were done using equipment called a cherry picker. When he got to he class there were a variety of people and ages attending the class. Right off the bat, the climbing equipment did not fit him and put him a day behind everyone else in the class until the proper gear could be acquired. He had to pay all his own expenses to attend the class. Three days into the class, he got up to go to his company vehicle in the motel parking lot and found it had been vandalized. Of course, he had to call the police and miss most of the class to take care of the incident. Now that meant two days that he had been unable to participate in the class. He called his supervisor and was told it was not important right now and to return to his job site and he could retake the class in about nine months. So he did. A week later he was called in by his supervisor and dismissed for the job for not passing the class. With all the expenses out of his personal pocket including a relocation, he was blown away and extremely upset. He called the state labor department and launched a complaint. It took him a few days to find out that several who failed the class who were under forty years of age had been retained and all those who failed who were over forty had been dismissed. Since he had worked in the field before and been certified in pole climbing with another affiliated company the union stepped in and said he should have never been dismissed or required to take the class. All said and done, nothing happened to re secure the job. He was given permission to sue the corporation for age discrimination by the state labor department. The real rub comes from the fact that a five hundred thousand dollars in a law suit is not sufficient to obtain legal representation. No lawyer was found who was willing to represent him on a contingency basis because as one of them finally told him, corporate attorneys regardless of whether he won the case or not, could tie him up in court until there was not a dime left to pay for the case. This is an amazing but true story. Hard to believe that to a corporation paying their attorney's an a hundred thousand dollar fee is cheaper than paying an employee half a million. Employees are just numbers and dollars to a corporation the size of the one he would have to fight. He dropped the case and moved on. Unfortunately, his case speaks loudly of how corporations view their employees. Many ex-employees commit suicide over these kinds of practices.
As a disabled person, if you are hired by a large corporation, be prepared to be disappointed. It does not always happen but in enough cases they will discover your disability if you have not told them, and before the probation period ends they will find ways to end the relationship. They will not refuse to hire you because that would violate the law but they will find excuses that are legitimate to end your employment. Many times they will find the requirements are different than originally presented and you do not fulfill the requirements. I do not know about all disabilities but I have seen people with Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity (ADHD), bipolar condition and epilepsy who have had it happen to them. All of these are invisible disabilities but disabilities none the less. Many time regardless of their claim of privacy in regards to group insurance, just filling out the enrollment card can disclose to much about any disabilities. Many of my disabled friends have experienced less compassion for their disability than a single parent seeking the same job. Honestly, most employers are only concerned about what they get from your employment and could care less if you are trying to survive in a world of problems and challenges. Personally, I have always found it best to keep my personal life apart from my employment to the maximum I can maintain. I try not to mention anything personal on the job including anything regarding health including today's headache. I definitely attempt to stay away from office gossip in any form.
Most employers I have encountered over the years tell you they are "family oriented" and concerned about the happiness of the employees. I perceive that as an untrue statement and made only to make you "feel good," appreciative and enthusiastic about the job. As a disabled person those words have a hollow ring. If your disability is episodic and requires time off of work for a doctor's appointment on any kind of regular basis during work hours, whether you are paid for the time or not, be prepared to be unemployed. Any disabled person can tell you that if they have to go to a specialist for their disability the appointment will probably take longer than normal time away from work for testing or changes in medications.
Let me tell you the story of family who were suddenly thrown into the world of disability. They were in a head-on collision due to no fault of their own. Insurance should have taken care of most of the injuries, but that was not the case. The person who hit them did not have insurance and the true cause of the accident, a piece of highway equipment without lights traveling after the time they should have been on the highway, could not be located. Both drivers acknowledge the highway equipment but the police could not find the responsible party to share the blame for the accident. The family, let's call them, Victor, Debbie and David, their real names. They were all injured. Victor the main income provider was able to secure SSDI. Debbie his wife, who was disabled prior to the accident with epilepsy, lost her spleen, was head injured and had other injuries. David, the baby, suffered a closed brain injury. To this day, none of them are able to work in the workforce. Debbie who should have received SSI has been denied and the ruling was found to be discriminatory by a higher court. Her lawyer has not been able to find any other judge willing to hear the case even with the discrimination ruling. So since 1989, they have all lived on the insufficient funds received by Victor.
They live in a sub-standard mobile with all three of them sharing one bedroom. David was assessed as never being able to progress beyond the age of ten, but Debbie did not find that acceptable and spent many hours working with him and educating him. Thank goodness nothing has happened to Victor and his disability has not killed him. Their story is so complicated in regards to social security it is ridiculous and it should not have been that way. Thank goodness Debbie did not accept the diagnosis on her son. He has his high school diploma and is trying to acquire some form of higher education. I am sure he will succeed with the support of his family. Without social security their living conditions have left lots to be desired and the money they need over and above Victor's SSDI payments have come from aluminum cans and "dumpster diving." Food banks have helped them. Welfare was not a option because of the social services ruling that they did not need help and all because of social security discrimination that cannot be resolved even though it has been found to be true. They have survived without SSI for Debbie or welfare for all these years and they will continue to survive. Debbie has taken advantage of educational resources and secured an associate degree in the past year and is attempting to secure a bachelor's in education. From her experience with her son, she feels she can help other brain injured children achieve their maximum educational recovery. She would like to open her own educational business after graduation where she will not have to depend on an employer for an income or work hours that aggravate her disability. I pray somehow that will be possible. If she cannot find a way to support herself when Victor dies, which will probably be before to long, she will be supporting herself on almost nothing. Whether her son ever is able to work in a regular work environment remains to be seen. I could write a book about their experiences but it still would not describe fully what this family has endured. The compromises they make on a daily basis would push many people into deep depression and a sense of hopelessness.
The dilemma between telling any employer you are disabled or not telling them results in a hard decision. I know I have told some employers who did not want to hear about my disability and their reason for not hiring me was "a reliability issue" as regards daily attendance. Is that a cute reason for denial of employ- ment? Whether I agree with them or not, or prior jobs indicate it has not been an issue, they believe it will be. I do not know of any employer or employee who has a fortune teller's crystal ball that will determine how much time off a person will need due to illness, disability or family issues. Unfortunately, some of us have more viewable issues than others.
After you have read the social security documents I linked to in Part 1 of this blog, let me refer you to one part specifically. This part pretty much represents the way social security views the matter.
"Social Security pays benefits to people who cannot work because they have a medical condition that is expected to last at least one year or result in death. Federal law requires this very strict definition of disability. While some programs give money to people with partial disability or short-term disability, Social Security does not."
This explains why so many have been denied benefits. Many have not been without and income for a year because of their disability and regardless of what a doctor tells social security, they seem to automatically not consider the disability permanent for at least a year.
I have seen one person with a different arrangement. She is blind and her mother assigned part of her social security benefits to her daughter. Since the girl has never been able to work a job with any permanence her disability payment is the major part of her income. Her vision will never improve and she was born without it. Currently, modern medicine has not been able to change her condition and the arrangement she has with social security based on her mother's benefits is and will always be her major income.
My own story about SSDI is interesting. When my husband asked for a divorce and I had no income of my own, it became necessary to probe the possibility of SSDI as a source of income. I called them and found I did not qualify because of my work history over the prior ten years did not give me enough quarters to secure payments. I do qualify for retirement income but SSDI. SSI would not help me because by divorce decree I could receive an income allocation that would be more than they would pay me. Enough said for me qualifying for SSDI.
Most divorce decrees only allow for spousal maintenance or alimony for a limited number of years which usually is between three to five years. However, when discussing it with my attorney I made sure he understood that part of the grounds for the divorce was based on my being too disabled from my husband's viewpoint. He agreed to the idea that I needed to capitalize on that view during mediation. I was fifty-seven years old with less than ten years before social security full retirement eligibility and a possible sixty-two year early retirement. Early retirement social security would not provide enough income to support me or even come close. I do not know of anyone who can live on four hundred dollars a month and remain independent. Although I have grown children, they have their own families to support.
I had to negotiate an income during the divorce that would carry me until retirement age. If that negotiation had not been found in my favor, I would have lost everything I owned. My husband had a 401K and was also due a retirement benefit from a prior job he had until the corporation where he was employed went into bankruptcy. Thank goodness he made a substantial income and at least I could ask for forty percent of his base income for me. He made substantially more than his base, but that was also one of those unreliable fluctuating sums of money. I based my request on his base yearly income. I do not know how other states deal with divorce, disability or income in regards to the spouse who is not working, but in Colorado we are an equitable state. I do not know all the ins and outs of the meaning of "equitable" but it did help with my divorce settlement. I still made some mistakes.
Divorce mediation is required in Colorado prior to the decree. Some of the things that were involved in mine should be considered by anyone seeking a divorce and especially if they are disabled and may not ever be able to work. I was fortunate that my husband conceded to my status of handicapped because if he had not I would have had to pay a doctor to certify all the things that I know are wrong with me and progressing as I grow older. He also could have contested any status of handicapped and cost both of us more money. I did agree to continue to seek employment, but that has been to no avail.
One of the areas of concern was a 401K and the current debts incurred by both of us. I do not think we handled the 401K properly. My husband should have been the one to pull the funds since he was over fifty-nine years of age and paid off all our debts instead of me. He would have paid less taxes in the long run, but because of his yearly income, he thought it would cost more because of the gross income he would have made. As it was, I ended up receiving almost nothing and would have been wise to have declared bankruptcy in order to have retained the benefit of an additional retirement income. As it is, all of the 401K is gone and most of it to taxes. However, the necessary repairs to the house in which I live, would have never been accomplished without taking it from the 401K.
The biggest adjustment came with a reduced income. None of my household bills at the time of the divorce were reduced and the income as a result of the divorce was short four hundred a month of just meeting the bills. The amount I received was less than one half of what I had to manage the household prior to divorce. Obviously over a years time a substantial amount of the 401K was depleted, and several years later, all of the money from the 401K was gone. In essence I used the majority of the 401K to pay debts that were mutual to us. He was able to maintain his A+ credit rating that way and within a few years after the divorce purchased his own home. Had we declared bankruptcy, that would not have happened.
During the negotiations I did do something that most people never think about. I requested that my husband provide life insurance to cover what I would receive if he were to die between the divorce and retirement time. The mediator thought that was a marvelous idea and more people should think ahead that way. I told her, if he died I would not have any income and would be on the street. That got her attention and she felt I had done her a service in providing her with something she should talk to her clients about in future negotiations.
I made one big mistake that I regret. I did not request he maintain health insurance for me. His group insurance would have permitted that to happen with a court order. COBRA ran out and the price they wanted to cover me was too high to pay. I payed for independent coverage for a time, until the payment became too high again. Now, I do not have coverage. I have recently been told I might have qualified for Medicare under the circumstances but again I would have had to fight for it. It only took one hospital visit for pneumonia for my health insurance provider to change my status to high-risk and price me out of private health coverage. I will not go into the high-risk insurance provided through the state because for all intent and purpose it might as well not be insurance. The cost for the coverage and the deductible is not affordable in any manner.
Thank goodness my divorce decree names my disability in the settlement papers. That was a blessing when one of the creditors tried to garnish my income. Once they found out I received maintenance due to a disability they had to stop per law. If I did not have that in a legal document, I would again have to prove I am disabled at my expense. I am grateful my ex-husband did agree with me and my settlement papers spell out all the problems that seem to keep me from working.
This year I will reach the age to acquire Medicare. From what I know so far, the cost will be affordable.
According to the mediator I did fare better than most disabled people she has worked with and receive more than SSDI would have paid me. It is still a pretty depressing thought when you consider come full social security retirement, again my income will be half of what I receive now. Thank goodness I was raised in a poor frugal family because I have always had a hard time spending money for anything but necessities.
With everything considered, I was able to stay afloat for longer than anyone expected. Last year I finally got a Chapter 7 bankruptcy decree. Now I have to figure how I am going to live on only social security when I retire. The cost of my housing, my mobile home is paid off, the park rent is monthly, and the income I will make does not leave enough to eat. So now, I am investigating other places to live that cost less and still meets my needs.
This story is how I have lived without social security disability insurance payments and how several of my friends have survived. I am not whining just relating how it is and telling you the problems that people face. Thanks for reading and let me know what you think and if you think we as a voting population should strive to change the laws in regards to social security. In part 3 of this blog, I will discuss some solutions to social security income and disability. I do not know of anyone who does not recognize the need for change.
No comments:
Post a Comment