Social Security vs other benefits

[LuvOrlando]

My head is spinning over Social Security & the payback recovery part which freaks me out because the stuff around me was paid for by DH not me. I don't think of myself as a thing he owns but the reach back to him and what is actually his stuff has me weirded out like I am a pet or something. It is as if he has me then I am his responsibility, like I am owned & I am just twisted up thinking on it. I was trying to help prevent myself from being a burden and it looks like this is worse.

Seems I was able to opt out of everything but Part A. Medicare said I could opt out but when I called Social Security said if I do opt out of A I am disenrolled so need to pay everything back which seems extreme if this is only Social Security Disability which does this. Do all sorts of supports have these clawbacks or just disabled people? Do people who get unemployment pay it back or open up their families to payback? Do people on welfare have this too? There is a very long list of social supports and I am wondering if disabled and elderly social security recipients are being singled out in a weird way?

Anyone understand this stuff? Why is it all so tough to discover the ins and outs?

 

[lanejudy]

There is zero reason to opt-out of Medicare Part A. No premium. It's simply extra coverage. Part A is "hospital" coverage, so depending on your healthcare needs, it may not even come into play. .

But there seems to be something lost in translation, or maybe the details are in another thread... are you applying for/collecting SSDI against your own earnings record? If so, it shouldn't impact your DH's record at all. I didn't think one can apply for SSDI against a spouse's earnings record.

As to others... unless they are age 65+ or qualify with a disability, most people in those groups you mention do not qualify for Medicare.

 

[sasywtch]

I think I'm confused and not understanding what is going on. My daughter has medi-care part A and B and also has another secondary insurance. Social security/medi-care does not check into her finances, state medi-cal (medicaid for other states) does. As the pp says, there is no reason to opt out of part A.

 

[GAN]

So let me see if I'm understanding correctly. You're signing up(or DH is) for Medicare and it sounds like you may have some kind of disability insurance. I believe the recovery is so that Medicare doesn't pay for care that should be covered by some other insurer. So if you got into a car accident and couldn't work and required regular medical visits to maintain your health ...Medicare isn't responsible for that -assuming someone else caused your accident, that party or their insurance is responsible. But Medicare will sometimes pay up front so there isn't a lapse in your care. You may have a totally different situation ...but yes, it does sound like a tangled web. Hopefully once you get it all figured out it won't be so difficult.

 

[_19disnA]

Didn't we have the same discussion last month?

Everyone has to signup for Medicare when they turn 65. If you are covered by a policy from a working spouse, you can still be covered by their policy/company, but still have to signup for Medicare at 65. If you have other complicating factors, I doubt anyone on here can help you with that.

 

[barkley]

if you are talking strictly social security disability there are 2 types-

ssd which is when you have enough work quarters in the system. you cannot draw off your spouse's quarters. the only 'payback recovery' would be if you were to be found to have disability insurance, workman's comp or in *certain* situations a disability based pension (very narrow civil service type). in those cases you can't 'double dip' and social security goes for reimbursement.

ssi which is when you don't have the work quarters AND your household income and assetts are under a certain amount. same rules on 'payback recovery'.


social security (all types) and medicare are 2 different programs with different eligibility criteria. unless you receive a valid over payment from social security due to ANY reason-there is no payback or recovery provision.

 

[focusondisney]

I just went on Medicare last year. Absolutely had no questions about my DH or his income. However, I carried the health insurance for both of us until I turned 65 & retired. He turned 65 over a year before I did. Because we had private insurance thru my employer, he only started Part A when he turned 65. If you don’t carry certain health insurance & you don’t take all Medicare, you will pay a penalty if you eventually go on Medicare. When I retired, we did have to get a form from my employer to prove he had health insurance. We needed to do that so he didn’t have to pay that penalty. It took minutes for me to fill out our part of the form & 1 phone call to my HR department to get them to fill in their part. It certainly wasn’t anything to make either of us feel “owned” or intrusive.


Now I have no idea what you’re talking about re: payback.

 

[tvguy]

My head is spinning over Social Security & the payback recovery part which freaks me out because the stuff around me was paid for by DH not me. I don't think of myself as a thing he owns but the reach back to him and what is actually his stuff has me weirded out like I am a pet or something. It is as if he has me then I am his responsibility, like I am owned & I am just twisted up thinking on it. I was trying to help prevent myself from being a burden and it looks like this is worse.

Seems I was able to opt out of everything but Part A. Medicare said I could opt out but when I called Social Security said if I do opt out of A I am disenrolled so need to pay everything back which seems extreme if this is only Social Security Disability which does this. Do all sorts of supports have these clawbacks or just disabled people? Do people who get unemployment pay it back or open up their families to payback? Do people on welfare have this too? There is a very long list of social supports and I am wondering if disabled and elderly social security recipients are being singled out in a weird way?

Anyone understand this stuff? Why is it all so tough to discover the ins and outs?

Sounds like you need to hire an attorney who specializes in Social Security Disability. Your questions seem beyond what any of us can reasonably answer.

 

[LuvOrlando]

I did call an attorney and am waiting.

Last month yes, and i thought it was figured out. But this week I get one answer from one group and a second answer from another group and both seem to be sort of right. You can opt out of some but not all.

Brand new thing I was most shocked to learn that once you are ok in the system seems you literally can't be removed, which makes me question all the medications out there that are supposed to make you better. It would seem that there is no such thing as better so how do the medications make sense? So if a disabled person goes on one of the big medications or treatments and it actually works and they can actually do cure a person, that disabled person can;t remove him or herself and rejoin the workforce?

Keep thinking I must be missing something but maybe I is how this works, it is such a bizarre setup. You would think they would want to be able to remove people if treatments work that weren't there when the system was created.


Also the whole notion of recovering the money is really working itself in like a splinter. I really am bothered to think that elderly people and disabled people might have a burden to repay that other people who get support do not which implies being singled out, which is not really in the spirit of US culture & law. Being singled out is actually a cornerstone for harassment and such so how is it ok here?

 

[GAN]

Also the whole notion of recovering the money is really working itself in like a splinter. I really am bothered to think that elderly people and disabled people might have a burden to repay that other people who get support do not which implies being singled out, which is not really in the spirit of US culture & law. Being singled out is actually a cornerstone for harassment and such so how is it ok here?

I think you need to get a clarification on this issue -it sounds like you might be missing a piece to the puzzle that would help make the "system" make more sense. A repayment would usually be the result of them(MediCare/Aid) making a payment on your behalf for something you were compensated by someone else for ...thus you need to pay them back. Hopefully the attorney can get you a more clear explanation.

 

[focusondisney]

Also the whole notion of recovering the money is really working itself in like a splinter. I really am bothered to think that elderly people and disabled people might have a burden to repay that other people who get support do not which implies being singled out, which is not really in the spirit of US culture & law. Being singled out is actually a cornerstone for harassment and such so how is it ok here?

To my way of thinking, receiving Social Security, Medicare & SSDI are permanent benefits. Once people start receiving them, they don’t stop. Especially SSDI. SSDI is supposed to be for when you have a permanent disability, isn’t it? Isn’t that why it’s so hard to get approved, you have to have tried everything but you’re still disabled?? Everything I’ve heard or read is it takes years to get approved for SSDI. After taking years waiting to get approved, I don’t imagine many people would be looking to stop benefits after all that.

Same with Medicare or SS. People make a conscious choice for those & once they start benefits, they very rarely look to stop them. Repaying benefits isn’t something most people ever have to worry about. Can it happen? Yes. For example, once you apply for SS, you are allowed to withdraw your SS application once in your life. And yes, you must repay any benefits already paid to you if you do that. But it is very rare for anyone to withdraw their application. I do have experience with this: my DH retired when he turned 65. He applied for SS, but before his 1st payment, he decided to take his employer up on an offer to work part time as a consultant. So we decided he would withdraw his SS application. Unfortunately as that withdrawal was being processed, he did receive one SS payment. We knew he would need to repay that amount & were prepared for that. It took over a year but he did eventually get a letter about repaying it. It did need to be repaid before he could reapply to permanently start his benefits.

But that’s really an isolated situation. Like I said, most people who make that conscious decision to start receiving their benefits will never be in a situation to withdraw their application or need to repay. That you can only withdraw your SS application once in your life just highlights that it is a permanent benefit. Repaying just isn’t something most elderly or disabled people ever need to think about.

 

[LuvOrlando]

To my way of thinking, receiving Social Security, Medicare & SSDI are permanent benefits. Once people start receiving them, they don’t stop. Especially SSDI. SSDI is supposed to be for when you have a permanent disability, isn’t it? Isn’t that why it’s so hard to get approved, you have to have tried everything but you’re still disabled?? Everything I’ve heard or read is it takes years to get approved for SSDI. After taking years waiting to get approved, I don’t imagine many people would be looking to stop benefits after all that.

Same with Medicare or SS. People make a conscious choice for those & once they start benefits, they very rarely look to stop them. Repaying benefits isn’t something most people ever have to worry about. Can it happen? Yes. For example, once you apply for SS, you are allowed to withdraw your SS application once in your life. And yes, you must repay any benefits already paid to you if you do that. But it is very rare for anyone to withdraw their application. I do have experience with this: my DH retired when he turned 65. He applied for SS, but before his 1st payment, he decided to take his employer up on an offer to work part time as a consultant. So we decided he would withdraw his SS application. Unfortunately as that withdrawal was being processed, he did receive one SS payment. We knew he would need to repay that amount & were prepared for that. It took over a year but he did eventually get a letter about repaying it. It did need to be repaid before he could reapply to permanently start his benefits.

But that’s really an isolated situation. Like I said, most people who make that conscious decision to start receiving their benefits will never be in a situation to withdraw their application or need to repay. That you can only withdraw your SS application once in your life just highlights that it is a permanent benefit. Repaying just isn’t something most elderly or disabled people ever need to think about.

All this is sort of true but where does that leave all the drugs on the market that are supposed to stop many diseases dead in their tracks? Do they or don't they work, and if they do work wouldn't full recovery be the point of the monumental cost and black box warnings?

I ask because I have been on more than one of these drugs in the hope of a recovery. So, in theory at least, there is something out there voicing that these medications are wonder drugs, at least that is how they were presented to me. I took the medicine thinking I could be cured, it didn't work in my case but apparently these medicines do work for some people. If we believe the advertisements there are medications that can possibly let people dance again. So for all the people they do work on, or if someday there is a miracle for me, well then what? If these new age miracle medicines work is the person forever still not ok?

Seems outdated thinking if all the new age medicines do what they are supposed to do. How can it be true that we live in an age of miracle medications and also not permit that they work? One idea excludes the other, both can't be true.

 

[focusondisney]

Again, I think trying the different treatments & medications happens before you go on SSDI. That’s why it takes years to get approved. I don’t know anyone who has ever gone on SSDI & then resolved the issue that caused their disability. If you don’t feel like you’ve tried every option or there might someday be a medication that will work, maybe don’t go on SSDI. SSDI is for permanent disability. If you don’t want to consider yourself permanently disabled, don’t go on SSDI.

As far as medications working or not, that’s always been true. Every medication or treatment will never work for every person the same way. And there have always been cases of every medical condition where “nothing works”. That’s not new, different or unusual.

 

[kymom99]

All this is sort of true but where does that leave all the drugs on the market that are supposed to stop many diseases dead in their tracks? Do they or don't they work, and if they do work wouldn't full recovery be the point of the monumental cost and black box warnings?

I ask because I have been on more than one of these drugs in the hope of a recovery. So, in theory at least, there is something out there voicing that these medications are wonder drugs, at least that is how they were presented to me. I took the medicine thinking I could be cured, it didn't work in my case but apparently these medicines do work for some people. If we believe the advertisements there are medications that can possibly let people dance again. So for all the people they do work on, or if someday there is a miracle for me, well then what? If these new age miracle medicines work is the person forever still not ok?

Seems outdated thinking if all the new age medicines do what they are supposed to do. How can it be true that we live in an age of miracle medications and also not permit that they work? One idea excludes the other, both can't be true.

If you want to go back to work, disabled or not, you can stop collecting benefits. You don’t have to pay it back from when you couldn’t work.

 

[tvguy]

. I don’t know anyone who has ever gone on SSDI & then resolved the issue that caused their disability.

May not be common, but my MIL did. She had anxiety and SSI accepted that as a disability that merited a lump sum settlement and monthly benefits. After three years she had resolved he anxiety issues and went back to work at another employer and stopped getting SSDI.
But full disclosure, she worked for a law firm that specialized in Workers Comp, Short, and long Term disability and Social Security Disability. He attorney had formerly worked with her at that law first, and she went to work for him after 3 years on SSDI.
And based on what I observed within both her employers, SSDI is not hard to qualify for, IF you have a good attorney, anyway.

 

[focusondisney]

May not be common, but my MIL did. She had anxiety and SSI accepted that as a disability that merited a lump sum settlement and monthly benefits. After three years she had resolved he anxiety issues and went back to work at another employer and stopped getting SSDI.
But full disclosure, she worked for a law firm that specialized in Workers Comp, Short, and long Term disability and Social Security Disability. He attorney had formerly worked with her at that law first, and she went to work for him after 3 years on SSDI.
And based on what I observed within both her employers, SSDI is not hard to qualify for, IF you have a good attorney, anyway.

But the questions is, did she have to pay back the money she received from SSDI? That seems to be the OP’s concern.

 

[tvguy]

But the questions is, did she have to pay back the money she received from SSDI? That seems to be the OP’s concern.

No, she did not. Like I said, OP needs a lawyer who specializes in SSDI.