I had a great back and forth discussion with one of my readers in the comments about how different evidence affects a Social Security disability case. Here is part of the comment:
If you go to a mental health clinic for disabling mental impairments, they usually score you and document how impaired you are and what your level of functioning is. So, I would think it would be easier getting your case approved for a mental health disability if the mental health clinic has documentation showing you have extreme low level of functioning vs. someone applying for disability for say chronic fatigue or something that is subjective.
There is nothing wrong with this analysis. However, Social Security disability cases are rarely formulaic. Winning a Social Security disability case is never as simple as having “A, B and C.”
While some evidence is better than others, an individual does not necessarily have a better chance of winning because they have one type of evidence over another.
In Social Security cases, an objective diagnosis is nice. However, the totality of the evidence is almost always more important.
Even cases with the same diagnosis have widely different chances of success based on the individual evidence in each case.
That means that there isn’t a cook book for handling disability cases. You have to individually evaluate each case.
Put another way, you cannot Rock, Paper, Scissors your way to winning a disability case.