Full text
6,011 characters
· extracted from
oa-html
· click to expand
Endometriosis and Disability: Analysis of Federal Court Appeals of Social Security Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income Claims by Individuals Suffering From Endometriosis
Public DepositedAdd to collection
You do not have access to any existing collections. You may create a new collection.
Downloadable Content
Download PDFCitation
MLA
Cromeens, Martha Grace, et al. Endometriosis and Disability: Analysis of Federal Court Appeals of Social Security Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income Claims by Individuals Suffering From Endometriosis. Elsevier, 2024. https://doi.org/10.17615/r1th-jw69APA
Cromeens, M., Knafl, K., Robinson, W., Carey, E., Haji Noor, Z., & Thoyre, S. (2024). Endometriosis and Disability: Analysis of Federal Court Appeals of Social Security Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income Claims by Individuals Suffering From Endometriosis. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.17615/r1th-jw69Chicago
Cromeens, Martha Grace, Kathleen Knafl, Whitney R Robinson, Erin T Carey, Zakiya Haji Noor, and Suzanne Thoyre. 2024. Endometriosis and Disability: Analysis of Federal Court Appeals of Social Security Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income Claims by Individuals Suffering From Endometriosis. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.17615/r1th-jw69- Creator
-
Cromeens, Martha Grace
- ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0551-5172
- School of Nursing
-
Knafl, Kathleen
- ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2623-2515
- School of Nursing
-
Robinson, Whitney R
- ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4009-0488
- Carolina Population Center
-
Carey, Erin T
- School of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology
-
Haji-Noor, Zakiya
- Gillings School of Global Public Health, Department of Epidemiology
-
Thoyre, Suzanne
- School of Nursing
-
Cromeens, Martha Grace
- Abstract
- BACKGROUND: Endometriosis, a chronic noncancerous gynecologic condition commonly characterized by disruptive physical and psychosocial symptoms, can be disabling. Individuals in the United States with endometriosis who are unable to work before retirement age can apply for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and/or Supplemental Security Income (SSI). Given the multi-step process of disability review, it is important to better understand how disability decisions are made. This study aimed to examine approaches and rationales of U.S. federal appeals courts reviewing SSDI and/or SSI claims involving endometriosis-related issues of appeal. METHODS: We searched Westlaw and Nexis Uni records, available as of January 2021, for federal appeals of SSDI and SSI claims including endometriosis as an impairment. Two independent reviewers screened full-text cases and extracted data. Framework Analysis was applied to courts' rationales regarding endometriosis-related issues of appeal. RESULTS: Eighty-seven appeals addressed an endometriosis-related issue. Three themes-evidence, treatment, and time-were identified across the decisions. The courts' discussions across themes exposed rationales and evidentiary requirements that posed challenges for claimants with endometriosis. The courts found subjective reports of symptoms insufficient evidence of impairment and positive responses to treatments to indicate cures or prevent claimants from demonstrating the necessary continuous 12 months of impairment. Some courts expected claimants to use treatments such as contraception or hysterectomy without addressing the risks of such treatments or the fact that they might have been counter to claimants' needs and preferences. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with endometriosis face evidentiary obstacles and common misconceptions about disease, diagnosis, and treatment in disability claims. SSDI and SSI endometriosis claims are systematically disadvantaged, particularly among those without access to care. The health care, policy, and legal systems can leverage the findings in this study to create a more equitable disability application and review system for those with chronic pain conditions such as endometriosis.
- Date of publication
- February 27, 2024
- Keyword
- individuals
- appeals court
- decision
- time—were
- claimants' needs
- review system
- gynecologic conditions
- diagnosis
- income
- disability insurance
- issues
- disability applicants
- disability reviews
- policy
- supplementation
- preferences
- impairment
- system
- study
- response to treatment
- endometriosis
- months
- retirement
- age
- care
- rationale
- federal appeals court
- units
- claims
- pain conditions
- disability decisions
- Social Security Disability Insurance
- discussion
- needs
- risk
- approach
- disease
- hysterectomy
- contraception
- analysis
- Court's discussion
- chronic pain conditions
- United States
- evidentiary obstacles
- framework
- appeal
- multi-step process
- treatment
- Supplemental Security Income
- Court's rationale
- Security Income
- findings
- cure
- cases
- Social
- court
- psychosocial symptoms
- obstacles
- evidentiary requirements
- positive response to treatment
- disability
- evidence of impairment
- data
- framework analysis
- themes
- claimants
- symptoms
- retirement age
- income claims
- state
- misconceptions
- conditions
- applications
- legal system
- health
- disability claims
- health care
- reports
- review
- insurance
- requirements
- DOI
- Identifier
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.whi.2023.11.008
- Dimensions ID: pub.1169214611
- PMCID: PMC11129848
- PMID: 38418360
- Resource type
- Article
- Rights statement
- In Copyright
- Journal title
- Women's Health Issues
- Journal volume
- 34
- Journal issue
- 3
- Page start
- 221
- Page end
- 231
- Funder
- National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities
- National Institute of Nursing Research
- ISSN
- 1049-3867
- 1878-4321
- Publisher
- Elsevier
Relations
- Parents:
This work has no parents.
Items
| Thumbnail | Title | Date Uploaded | Visibility | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PIIS1049386723002098.pdf | 2024-09-13 | Public | Download |
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.