Representing Disabled Clients for Over 25 Years

Social Security Lawyer
FREE CONSULTATION

Donald H. Peters

248-549-3485

Percentage Fee

Only If You Win!

Introduction

The structure of the mental disorders listings for children under age 18 parallels the structure for the mental disorders listings for adults but is modified to reflect the presentation of mental disorders in children. The listings for mental disorders in children are arranged in 11 diagnostic categories: Organic mental disorders (112.02); schizophrenic, delusional (paranoid), schizoaffective, and other psychotic disorders (112.03); mood disorders (112.04); mental retardation (112.05); anxiety disorders (112.06); somatoform, eating, and tic disorders (112.07); personality disorders (112.08); psychoactive substance dependence disorders (112.09); autistic disorder and other pervasive developmental disorders (112.10); attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (112.11); and developmental and emotional disorders of newborn and younger infants (112.12).

There are significant differences between the listings for adults and the listings for children. There are disorders found in children that have no real analogy in adults; hence, the differences in the diagnostic categories for children. The presentation of mental disorders in children, particularly the very young child, may be subtle and of a character different from the signs and symptoms found in adults. For example, findings such as separation anxiety, failure to mold or bond with the parents, or withdrawal may serve as findings comparable to findings that mark mental disorders in adults. The activities appropriate to children, such as learning, growing, playing, maturing, and school adjustment, are also different from the activities appropriate to the adult and vary widely in the different childhood stages.

Each listing begins with an introductory statement that describes the disorder or disorders addressed by the listing. This is followed (except in listings 112.05 and 112.12) by paragraph A criteria (a set of medical findings) and paragraph B criteria (a set of impairment-related functional limitations). An individual will be found to have a listed impairment when the criteria of both paragraphs A and B of the listed impairment are satisfied.

The purpose of the criteria in paragraph A is to substantiate medically the presence of a particular mental disorder. Specific symptoms and signs under any of the listings 112.02 through 112.12 cannot be considered in isolation from the description of the mental disorder contained at the beginning of each listing category. Impairments should be analyzed or reviewed under the mental category(ies) indicated by the medical findings.

Paragraph A of the listings is a composite of medical findings which are used to substantiate the existence of a disorder and may or may not be appropriate for children at specific developmental stages. However, a range of medical findings is included in the listings so that no age group is excluded. For example, in listing 112.02A7, emotional lability and crying would be inappropriate criteria to apply to older infants and toddlers, age 1 to attainment of age 3; whereas in listing 112.02A1, developmental arrest, delay, or regression are appropriate criteria for older infants and toddlers. Whenever the adjudicator decides that the requirements of paragraph A of a particular mental listing are satisfied, then that listing should be applied regardless of the age of the child to be evaluated.

The purpose of the paragraph B criteria is to describe impairment-related functional limitations which are applicable to children. Standardized tests of social or cognitive function and adaptive behavior are frequently available and appropriate for the evaluation of children and, thus, such tests are included in the paragraph B functional parameters. The functional restrictions in paragraph B must be the result of the mental disorder which is manifested by the medical findings in paragraph A.

We did not include separate C criteria for listings 112.02, 112.03, 112.04, and 112.06, as are found in the adult listings, because for the most part we do not believe that the residual disease processes described by these listings are commonly found in children. However, in unusual cases where these disorders are found in children and are comparable to the severity and duration found in adults, we may use the adult listings 12.02C, 12.03C, 12.04C, and 12.06C criteria to evaluate such cases.

The structure of the listings for Mental Retardation (112.05) and Developmental and Emotional Disorders of Newborn and Younger Infants (112.12) is different from that of the other mental disorders. Listing 112.05 (Mental Retardation) contains six sets of criteria. If an impairment satisfies the diagnostic description in the introductory paragraph and any one of the six sets of criteria, we will find that the child's impairment meets the listing. For listings 112.05D and 112.05F, we will assess the degree of functional limitation the additional impairment(s) imposes to determine if it causes more than minimal functional limitations, i.e., is a "severe" impairment(s), as defined in § 416.924(c).

If the additional impairment(s) does not cause limitations that are "severe" as defined in § 416.924(c), we will not find that the additional impairment(s) imposes an additional and significant limitation of function. Listing 112.12 (Developmental and Emotional Disorders of Newborn and Younger Infants) contains five criteria, any one of which, if satisfied, will result in a finding that the infant's impairment meets the listing.

It must be remembered that these listings are examples of common mental disorders that are severe enough to find a child disabled. When a child has a medically determinable impairment that is not listed, an impairment that does not meet the requirements of a listing, or a combination of impairments no one of which meets the requirements of a listing, we will make a determination whether the child's impairment(s) medically or functionally equals the listings. (See §§ 404.1526, 416.926, and 416.926a.) This determination can be especially important in older infants and toddlers (age 1 to attainment of age 3), who may be too young for identification of a specific diagnosis, yet demonstrate serious functional limitations. Therefore, the determination of equivalency is necessary to the evaluation of any child's case when the child does not have an impairment that meets a listing.

Need for medical evidence

The existence of a medically determinable impairment of the required duration must be established by medical evidence consisting of symptoms, signs, and laboratory findings (including psychological or developmental test findings). Symptoms are complaints presented by the child. Psychiatric signs are medically demonstrable phenomena that indicate specific psychological abnormalities, e.g., abnormalities of behavior, mood, thought, memory, orientation, development, or perception, as described by an appropriate medical source. Symptoms and signs generally cluster together to constitute recognizable mental disorders described in paragraph A of the listings. These findings may be intermittent or continuous depending on the nature of the disorder.

Assessment of severity

In childhood cases, as with adults, severity is measured according to the functional limitations imposed by the medically determinable mental impairment. However, the range of functions used to assess impairment severity for children varies at different stages of maturation.

The functional areas that we consider are: Motor function; cognitive/communicative function; social function; personal function; and concentration, persistence, or pace. In most functional areas, there are two alternative methods of documenting the required level of severity: (1) Use of standardized tests alone, where appropriate test instruments are available, and (2) use of other medical findings. (See 112.00D for explanation of these documentation requirements.) The use of standardized tests is the preferred method of documentation if such tests are available.

Newborn and younger infants (birth to attainment of age 1) have not developed sufficient personality differentiation to permit formulation of appropriate diagnoses. We have, therefore, assigned listing 112.12 for Developmental and Emotional Disorders of Newborn and Younger Infants for the evaluation of mental disorders of such children. Severity of these disorders is based on measures of development in motor, cognitive/communicative, and social functions. When older infants and toddlers (age 1 to attainment of age 3) do not clearly satisfy the paragraph A criteria of any listing because of insufficient developmental differentiation, they must be evaluated under the rules for equivalency. The principles for assessing the severity of impairment in such children, described in the following paragraphs, must be employed.

Generally, when we assess the degree of developmental delay imposed by a mental impairment, we will use an infant's or toddler's chronological age; i.e., the child's age based on birth date. If the infant or toddler was born prematurely, however, we will follow the rules in § 416.924b(b) to determine whether we should use the infant's or toddler's corrected chronological age; i.e., the chronological age adjusted by the period of gestational prematurity.

In defining the severity of functional limitations, two different sets of paragraph B criteria corresponding to two separate age groupings have been established, in addition to listing 112.12, which is for children who have not attained age 1. These age groups are: older infants and toddlers (age 1 to attainment of age 3) and children (age 3 to attainment of age 18). However, the discussion below in 112.00C1, 2, 3, and 4, on the age-appropriate areas of function, is broken down into four age groupings: older infants and toddlers (age 1 to attainment of age 3), preschool children (age 3 to attainment of age 6), primary school children (age 6 to attainment of age 12), and adolescents (age 12 to attainment of age 18). This was done to provide specific guidance on the age group variances in disease manifestations and methods of evaluation.

Where "marked" is used as a standard for measuring the degree of limitation it means more than moderate but less than extreme. A marked limitation may arise when several activities or functions are impaired, or even when only one is impaired, as long as the degree of limitation is such as to interfere seriously with the ability to function (based upon age-appropriate expectations) independently, appropriately, effectively, and on a sustained basis. When standardized tests are used as the measure of functional parameters, a valid score that is two standard deviations below the norm for the test will be considered a marked restriction.

  1. Older infants and toddlers (age 1 to attainment of age 3). In this age group, impairment severity is assessed in three areas: (a) Motor development, (b) cognitive/ communicative function, and (c) social function.
    1. Motor development. Much of what we can discern about mental function in these children frequently comes from observation of the degree of development of fine and gross motor function. Developmental delay, as measured by a good developmental milestone history confirmed by medical examination, is critical. This information will ordinarily be available in the existing medical evidence from the claimant's treating sources and other medical sources, supplemented by information from nonmedical sources, such as parents, who have observed the child and can provide pertinent historical information. It may also be available from standardized testing. If the delay is such that the older infant or toddler has not achieved motor development generally acquired by children no more than one-half the child's chronological age, the criteria are satisfied.
    2. Cognitive/communicative function. Cognitive/communicative function is measured using one of several standardized infant scales. Appropriate tests for the measure of such function are discussed in 112.00D. Screening instruments may be useful in uncovering potentially serious impairments, but often must be supplemented by other data. However, in some cases, the results of screening tests may show such obvious abnormalities that further testing will clearly be unnecessary. For older infants and toddlers, alternative criteria covering disruption in communication as measured by their capacity to use simple verbal and nonverbal structures to communicate basic needs are provided.
    3. Social function. Social function in older infants and toddlers is measured in terms of the development of relatedness to people (e.g., bonding and stranger anxiety) and attachment to animate or inanimate objects. Criteria are provided that use standard social maturity scales or alternative criteria that describe marked impairment in socialization.
  2. Preschool children (age 3 to attainment of age 6). For the age groups including preschool children through adolescence, the functional areas used to measure severity are: (a) Cognitive/communicative function, (b) social function, (c) personal function, and (d) deficiencies of concentration, persistence, or pace resulting in frequent failure to complete tasks in a timely manner. After 36 months, motor function is no longer felt to be a primary determinant of mental function, although, of course, any motor abnormalities should be documented and evaluated.
    1. Cognitive / communicative function. In the preschool years and beyond, cognitive function can be measured by standardized tests of intelligence, although the appropriate instrument may vary with age. A primary criterion for limited cognitive function is a valid verbal, performance, or full scale IQ of 70 or less. The listings also provide alternative criteria, consisting of tests of language development or bizarre speech patterns.
    2. Social function. Social functioning refers to a child's capacity to form and maintain relationships with parents, other adults, and peers. Social functioning includes the ability to get along with others (e.g., family members, neighborhood friends, classmates, teachers). Impaired social functioning may be caused by inappropriate externalized actions (e.g., running away, physical aggression--but not self-injurious actions, which are evaluated in the personal area of functioning), or inappropriate internalized actions (e.g., social isolation, avoidance of interpersonal activities, mutism). Its severity must be documented in terms of intensity, frequency, and duration, and shown to be beyond what might be reasonably expected for age. Strength in social functioning may be documented by such things as the child's ability to respond to and initiate social interaction with others, to sustain relationships, and to participate in group activities. Cooperative behaviors, consideration for others, awareness of others' feelings, and social maturity, appropriate to a child's age, also need to be considered. Social functioning in play and school may involve interactions with adults, including responding appropriately to persons in authority (e.g., teachers, coaches) or cooperative behaviors involving other children. Social functioning is observed not only at home but also in preschool programs.
    3. Personal function. Personal functioning in preschool children pertains to self-care; i.e., personal needs, health, and safety (feeding, dressing, toileting, bathing; maintaining personal hygiene, proper nutrition, sleep, health habits; adhering to medication or therapy regimens; following safety precautions). Development of self-care skills is measured in terms of the child's increasing ability to help himself/herself and to cooperate with others in taking care of these needs. Impaired ability in this area is manifested by failure to develop such skills, failure to use them, or self-injurious actions. This function may be documented by a standardized test of adaptive behavior or by a careful description of the full range of self-care activities. These activities are often observed not only at home but also in preschool programs.
    4. Concentration, persistence, or pace. This function may be measured through observations of the child in the course of standardized testing and in the course of play.
  3. Primary school children (age 6 to attainment of age 12). The measures of function here are similar to those for preschool-age children except that the test instruments may change and the capacity to function in the school setting is supplemental information. Standardized measures of academic achievement, e.g., Wide Range Achievement Test-Revised, Peabody Individual Achievement Test, etc., may be helpful in assessing cognitive impairment. Problems in social functioning, especially in the area of peer relationships, are often observed first hand by teachers and school nurses. As described in 112.00D, Documentation, school records are an excellent source of information concerning function and standardized testing and should always be sought for school-age children. As it applies to primary school children, the intent of the functional criterion described in paragraph B2d, i.e., deficiencies of concentration, persistence, or pace resulting in failure to complete tasks in a timely manner, is to identify the child who cannot adequately function in primary school because of a mental impairment. Although grades and the need for special education placement are relevant factors which must be considered in reaching a decision under paragraph B2d, they are not conclusive. There is too much variability from school district to school district in the expected level of grading and in the criteria for special education placement to justify reliance solely on these factors.
  4. Adolescents (age 12 to attainment of age 18). Functional criteria parallel to those for primary school children (cognitive/ communicative; social; personal; and concentration, persistence, or pace) are the measures of severity for this age group. Testing instruments appropriate to adolescents should be used where indicated. Comparable findings of disruption of social function must consider the capacity to form appropriate, stable, and lasting relationships. If information is available about cooperative working relationships in school or at part-time or full-time work, or about the ability to work as a member of a group, it should be considered when assessing the child's social functioning. Markedly impoverished social contact, isolation, withdrawal, and inappropriate or bizarre behavior under the stress of socializing with others also constitute comparable findings. (Note that self-injurious actions are evaluated in the personal area of functioning.)
    1. Personal functioning in adolescents pertains to self-care. It is measured in the same terms as for younger children, the focus, however, being on the adolescent's ability to take care of his or her own personal needs, health, and safety without assistance. Impaired ability in this area is manifested by failure to take care of these needs or by self-injurious actions. This function may be documented by a standardized test of adaptive behavior or by careful descriptions of the full range of self-care activities.
    2. In adolescents, the intent of the functional criterion described in paragraph B2d is the same as in primary school children. However, other evidence of this functional impairment may also be available, such as from evidence of the child's performance in work or work-like settings.

Documentation

  1. The presence of a mental disorder in a child must be documented on the basis of reports from acceptable sources of medical evidence. See §§ 404.1513 and 416.913. Descriptions of functional limitations may be available from these sources, either in the form of standardized test results or in other medical findings supplied by the sources, or both. (Medical findings consist of symptoms, signs, and laboratory findings.) Whenever possible, a medical source's findings should reflect the medical source's consideration of information from parents or other concerned individuals who are aware of the child's activities of daily living, social functioning, and ability to adapt to different settings and expectations, as well as the medical source's findings and observations on examination, consistent with standard clinical practice. As necessary, information from nonmedical sources, such as parents, should also be used to supplement the record of the child's functioning to establish the consistency of the medical evidence and longitudinality of impairment severity.
  2. For some newborn and younger infants, it may be very difficult to document the presence or severity of a mental disorder. Therefore, with the exception of some genetic diseases and catastrophic congenital anomalies, it may be necessary to defer making a disability decision until the child attains 3 months of age in order to obtain adequate observation of behavior or affect. See, also, 110.00 of this part. This period could be extended in cases of premature infants depending on the degree of prematurity and the adequacy of documentation of their developmental and emotional status.
  3. For infants and toddlers, programs of early intervention involving occupational, physical, and speech therapists, nurses, social workers, and special educators, are a rich source of data. They can provide the developmental milestone evaluations and records on the fine and gross motor functioning of these children. This information is valuable and can complement the medical examination by a physician or psychologist. A report of an interdisciplinary team that contains the evaluation and signature of an acceptable medical source is considered acceptable medical evidence rather than supplemental data.
  4. In children with mental disorders, particularly those requiring special placement, school records are a rich source of data, and the required reevaluations at specified time periods can provide the longitudinal data needed to trace impairment progression over time.
  5. In some cases where the treating sources lack expertise in dealing with mental disorders of children, it may be necessary to obtain evidence from a psychiatrist, psychologist, or pediatrician with experience and skill in the diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders as they appear in children. In these cases, however, every reasonable effort must be made to obtain the records of the treating sources, since these records will help establish a longitudinal picture that cannot be established through a single purchased examination.
  6. Reference to a "standardized psychological test" indicates the use of a psychological test measure that has appropriate validity, reliability, and norms, and is individually administered by a qualified specialist. By "qualified," we mean the specialist must be currently licensed or certified in the State to administer, score, and interpret psychological tests and have the training and experience to perform the test.
  7. Psychological tests are best considered as standardized sets of tasks or questions designed to elicit a range of responses. Psychological testing can also provide other useful data, such as the specialist's observations regarding the child's ability to sustain attention and concentration, relate appropriately to the specialist, and perform tasks independently (without prompts or reminders). Therefore, a report of test results should include both the objective data and any clinical observations.
  8. The salient characteristics of a good test are: (1) Validity, i.e., the test measures what it is supposed to measure; (2) reliability, i.e., the consistency of results obtained over time with the same test and the same individual; (3) appropriate normative data, i.e., individual test scores can be compared to test data from other individuals or groups of a similar nature, representative of that population; and (4) wide scope of measurement, i.e., the test should measure a broad range of facets/aspects of the domain being assessed. In considering the validity of a test result, we should note and resolve any discrepancies between formal test results and the child's customary behavior and daily activities.
  9. Identical IQ scores obtained from different tests do not always reflect a similar degree of intellectual functioning. The IQ scores in listing 112.05 reflect values from tests of general intelligence that have a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15, e.g., the Wechsler series. IQs obtained from standardized tests that deviate from a mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15 require conversion to a percentile rank so that the actual degree of limitation reflected by the IQ scores can be determined. In cases where more than one IQ is customarily derived from the test administered, e.g., where verbal, performance, and full scale IQs are provided in the Wechsler series, the lowest of these is used in conjunction with listing 112.05.
  10. IQ test results must also be sufficiently current for accurate assessment under 112.05. Generally, the results of IQ tests tend to stabilize by the age of 16. Therefore, IQ test results obtained at age 16 or older should be viewed as a valid indication of the child's current status, provided they are compatible with the child's current behavior. IQ test results obtained between ages 7 and 16 should be considered current for 4 years when the tested IQ is less than 40, and for 2 years when the IQ is 40 or above. IQ test results obtained before age 7 are current for 2 years if the tested IQ is less than 40 and 1 year if at 40 or above.
  11. Standardized intelligence test results are essential to the adjudication of all cases of mental retardation that are not covered under the provisions of listings 112.05A, 112.05B, and 112.05F. Listings 112.05A, 112.05B, and 112.05F may be the bases for adjudicating cases where the results of standardized intelligence tests are unavailable, e.g., where the child's young age or condition precludes formal standardized testing.
  12. In conjunction with clinical examinations, sources may report the results of screening tests, i.e., tests used for gross determination of level of functioning. Screening instruments may be useful in uncovering potentially serious impairments, but often must be supplemented by other data. However, in some cases the results of screening tests may show such obvious abnormalities that further testing will clearly be unnecessary.
  13. Where reference is made to developmental milestones, this is defined as the attainment of particular mental or motor skills at an age-appropriate level, i.e., the skills achieved by an infant or toddler sequentially and within a given time period in the motor and manipulative areas, in general understanding and social behavior, in self-feeding, dressing, and toilet training, and in language. This is sometimes expressed as a developmental quotient (DQ), the relation between developmental age and chronological age as determined by specific standardized measurements and observations. Such tests include, but are not limited to, the Cattell Infant Intelligence Scale, the Bayley Scales of Infant Development, and the Revised Stanford-Binet. Formal tests of the attainment of developmental milestones are generally used in the clinical setting for determination of the developmental status of infants and toddlers.
  14. Formal psychological tests of cognitive functioning are generally in use for preschool children, for primary school children, and for adolescents except for those instances noted below.
  15. Generally, it is preferable to use IQ measures that are wide in scope and include items that test both verbal and performance abilities. However, in special circumstances, such as the assessment of children with sensory, motor, or communication abnormalities, or those whose culture and background are not principally English-speaking, measures such as the Test of Nonverbal Intelligence, Third Edition (TONI-3), Leiter International Performance Scale-Revised (Leiter-R), or Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Third Edition (PPVT-III) may be used.
  16. We may consider exceptions to formal standardized psychological testing when an individual qualified by training and experience to perform such an evaluation is not available, or in cases where appropriate standardized measures for the child's social, linguistic, and cultural background are not available. In these cases, the best indicator of severity is often the level of adaptive functioning and how the child performs activities of daily living and social functioning.
  17. Comprehensive neuropsychological examinations may be used to establish the existence and extent of compromise of brain function, particularly in cases involving organic mental disorders. Normally these examinations include assessment of cerebral dominance, basic sensation and perception, motor speed and coordination, attention and concentration, visual-motor function, memory across verbal and visual modalities, receptive and expressive speech, higher-order linguistic operations, problem-solving, abstraction ability, and general intelligence. In addition, there should be clinical interview geared toward evaluating pathological features known to occur frequently in neurological disease and trauma, e.g., emotional lability, abnormality of mood, impaired impulse control, passivity and apathy, or inappropriate social behavior. The specialist performing the examination may administer one of the commercially available comprehensive neuropsychological batteries, such as the Luria-Nebraska or Halstead-Reitan, or a battery of tests selected as relevant to the suspected brain dysfunction. The specialist performing the examination must be properly trained in this area of neuroscience.

Call Now!

If you wish to hire a licensed Attorney to help win your claim, call Social Security Professionals.

Call Social Security Professionals now to discuss your claim for free!

You need no money to hire Attorney Donald H. Peters

(248) 549-3485
FREE CONSULTATION

Call Social Security Professionals now to discuss your claim for free

You need no money to hire Attorney Donald H. Peters

(248) 549-3485
FREE CONSULTATION

Southfield Lawyer Donald Peters of the Law Office of Donald H. Peters, P.C. in Southfield, Michigan, handles Social Security Disability claims throughout Michigan and in the Tri-County Metro Detroit area including Detroit, Southfield, Novi, Warren, Royal Oak, Roseville, Livonia, Mount Clemens, Sterling Heights, Farmington Hills, Birmingham, Berkley, Oak Park, West Bloomfield, Ann Arbor, Eastpointe, Waterford, Flint, Canton, Taylor, Romulus, Westland, Clinton Township, Troy, Dearborn, Brighton, Howell, Pontiac, Rochester Hills,  as well as Wayne County, Oakland County, Macomb County, Ingham County, and Livingston County, Michigan.

Disclaimer

Material presented on the Social Security Professionals website is intended for general informational purposes only.  It is not intended as professional advice in any manner and should not be construed as such.  Individuals should never act upon any information provided in a website except that you should seek the advice of an Attorney. 

For the most up to date content regarding Social Security Disability please reference the Social Security Administration's website.

You may call Social Security Professionals and discuss your claim for free at:

(248) 549-3485