Social services – Disability – Substance abuse

Listen to this article

Where the plaintiff was denied Social Security Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income benefits by the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, that ruling should be affirmed based on a finding that the plaintiff was not disabled because if he stopped his substance abuse, there would be a significant number of jobs in the national economy that he could perform.

“The primary issue in this case is whether [plaintiff Eric W.] Schell’s alcohol abuse affects his disability. An individual is not considered disabled under the Social Security Act if alcohol abuse or drug addiction is a contributing factor material to the determination of disability. …

“The issue of whether Schell is disabled is not an issue for any particular doctor but, rather, is reserved to the Commissioner. … [T]he Commissioner is not required to give ‘greater weight to the opinions of treating physicians’ or accept their conclusions on the ultimate issue of disability. … Furthermore, if a treating physician’s opinion is inconsistent with other substantial evidence in the record, it is not entitled to controlling weight. …

“Taken as a whole, the evidence in the record can be found to be at odds with a conclusion that Schell was unable to perform any type of work. …

“Schell also alleges that the ALJ relied on his own lay opinion to conclude that Schell’s substance abuse remains ongoing. The argument is incorrect. Schell himself testified at the hearing that he drank a 40-ounce beer the week before the hearing, a clear indication that he was still using alcohol.”

Schell v. Astrue (Lawyers Weekly No. 02-086-12) (16 pages) (O’Toole, J.) (USDC) (Civil Action No. 10-10346-GAO) (March 7, 2012).

Click here for the full-text opinion.