When Social Security decision makers consider medical or psychiatric evidence, they assign certain "pecking order" to the doctors who provide the evidence. There are generally 4 levels of weight that may be ascribed to a doctor's medical opinion under the federal regulations:
Little weight may be given to a doctor who has not examined or treated the claimant. For example, this might be a doctor employed at Social Security who simply reviewed the claimant's application and/or medical records but never examined the claimant.
Substantial weight may be given to a doctor who has examined the patient, especially if his or her findings are consistent with the other medical evidence in the record.
Great weight should be accorded to a doctor who has both examined the patient and has had a treating relationship. The longer the doctor has treated the claimant, the more weight decision makers will usually give the doctor's opinions.
Controlling weight may be given to a doctor who is in a position to know the claimant best, and whose medical opinion appears consistent with the preponderance of evidence in the objective medical records. Again, this might be a doctor who is a specialist in her field, has frequently examined the claimant and who has a long history of treating the claimant.
Generally, then, an examining doctor is given more weight than a non-examining doctor. A treating doctor is given more weight than an examining non-treating doctor. A specialist practicing in his/her field is given more weight than a doctor who is not a specialist.
The weight (pecking order) given to doctors by Social Security decision makers is prescribed in the law at 20 Code of Federal Regulations, Subpart P, Part 404, Section 1527 (20 CFR 404.1527). Thus, all doctors are not created equal in the eyes of Social Security.
Little weight may be given to a doctor who has not examined or treated the claimant. For example, this might be a doctor employed at Social Security who simply reviewed the claimant's application and/or medical records but never examined the claimant.
Substantial weight may be given to a doctor who has examined the patient, especially if his or her findings are consistent with the other medical evidence in the record.
Great weight should be accorded to a doctor who has both examined the patient and has had a treating relationship. The longer the doctor has treated the claimant, the more weight decision makers will usually give the doctor's opinions.
Controlling weight may be given to a doctor who is in a position to know the claimant best, and whose medical opinion appears consistent with the preponderance of evidence in the objective medical records. Again, this might be a doctor who is a specialist in her field, has frequently examined the claimant and who has a long history of treating the claimant.
Generally, then, an examining doctor is given more weight than a non-examining doctor. A treating doctor is given more weight than an examining non-treating doctor. A specialist practicing in his/her field is given more weight than a doctor who is not a specialist.
The weight (pecking order) given to doctors by Social Security decision makers is prescribed in the law at 20 Code of Federal Regulations, Subpart P, Part 404, Section 1527 (20 CFR 404.1527). Thus, all doctors are not created equal in the eyes of Social Security.
Comments
Post a Comment