The Social Security Administration just altered the way in which claimants, and their lawyers, must submit evidence in their cases. Until now, the SSA regulations were, at best, unclear, as to whether a claimant had to submit evidence that did not tend to show she was disabled. This was a point of real contention with sound arguments on both sides. But SSA has resolved the argument in their favor. As of April 20, 2015 a claimant must submit all evidence that “relates” to her disability claim. “Relate” is not a common word in evidentiary rules and regulations. Material and relevant, for example, are in much wider use. There is also a lot of law about what is material and what is relevant. By using “relate” it appears that SSA has injected some vagueness into their rule. Their goal could be to cast as wide a net as possible. But, what does “relate” mean in the context of legal evidence? The new regulation also requires a claimant to submit the entirety of any evidence. This seems like a poor approach. Hospital records, for example, can run into thousands of pages. Almost all of them can be repetitions of early findings or the ceaseless recording of vitals. Does SSA really want all of that? A good lawyer could probably reduce a thousand pages of hospital records down to thirty or so that actually have any real bearing on the medical issues involved. I always thought that the risk of representatives withholding information was overblown. Lawyers have ethical obligations outside of the SSA regulations. Non-attorney representatives don’t have that concern. But there is nothing to suggest that they are less ethical in their work than lawyers. I hope that SSA gets the results they are looking for with these new regulations. My guess: it will just make things slower and more complicated.
If you are a masochist, you can read the new regulations at 20 CFR Parts 404, 405, and 416
