Did Social Security use the RIGHT KIND of doctor?

Social Security has physicians review disability cases as medical consultant’s to make opinions on individual’s abilities and limitations.

However, there are all sorts of doctors: general practitioners, primary care, cardiologists, pulmonologists, rheumatologists, orthopedists,  podiatrists, dentists, and the list goes on!

So you have to know WHAT KIND of doctor Social Security used to review your file! What good is the medical consultant’s opinion if they don’t have expertise in with the disability in question.

Per Nate Craig:

… you may also want to look at the Medical Consultant’s Code attached to the State Agency’s opinion. I am finding more and more reviewing physician’s making opinions outside their professional field. Recently an ALJ relied on the State Agency’s opinion where the initial decision was made by a SDM and then affirmed by a “dermatologist” MCC of 6. The AC kicked it back with the directive for another physical CE. At the remand hearing, the same ALJ entered a decision of disability back to original onset date.

Wondering if the medical consultant on your case had the necessary expertise to make an opinion? Check the consultant’s code (next to the signature on the last page) with the list the at Social Security.

Note: the consultant’s codes appear on forms from doctors who review cases, not the doctors who exam claimants at consultative examinations.

MC/PC Specialty Codes
01 Anesthesiology
02 Ambulatory Medicine
03 Audiology
04 Cardiology
05 Cardiopulmonary
06 Dermatology
07 E.E.N.T.
08 E.N.T.
09 E.T.
10 Emergency Room Medicine
11 Endocrinology
12 Family or General Practice
13 Gastroenterology
14 Geriatrics
15 Gynecology
16 Hematology
17 Industrial Medicine
18 Infectious Diseases
19 Internal Medicine
20 Neurology
21 Neuro-Ophthalmology
22 Neuro-Psychiatry
23 Neonatology
24 Nephrology
25 Obstetrics
26 Occupational Medicine
27 Oncology
28 Ophthalmology
29 Orthopedics
30 Osteopathy
31 Pathology
32 Pediatrics
33 Physiatry
34 Physical Medicine
35 Plastic Surgery
36 Preventative Medicine
37 Psychiatry
38 Psychology
39 Public Health
40 Pulmonary
41 Radiology
42 Rehabilitative Medicine
43 Rheumatology
44 Special Senses
45 Surgery
46 Urology
47 Other
48 Speech-Language Pathology
49 Child and Adolescent Psychiatry

  • TJ

    I think I got railroaded twice when it comes to the SSA using the incorrect examiners to evaluate my claim.

    During the initial evaluation stages, I had a 5 minute CE with a doctor who is simply an internist (my impairment is a rare form of Rheumatism). A second state agency examiner piggy-backed off the CE’s report thus creating another unfavorable RFC. This examiner isn’t even board certified (I think she was simply a general family practitioner). To finish off, even another state agency examiner “affirmed” the conclusion of the previous report (yet there was nothing noted as to what she affirmed or how she affirmed, etc.). It was simply a form where she stated she affirmed the previous RFC. I researched and found this to be a classic case of stacked hearsay. Out of those 3 RFC reports, ONE doctor so-called “examined” me for 5 minutes, yet that’s enough to produce 3 different unfavorable RFC’s? Really?

    The second issue was during my second ALJ hearing when a Medical Expert was to testify about me meeting a listing. Without prior notification, the ME was allowed to testify over the telephone. My representative didn’t object. The ME is “only” qualified as a child Psychiatrist, yet he was allowed to testify about a rare disease of the spine? Really? Again, my representative didn’t object to the ME’s qualifications. I later found out the ME lives 4 miles from the hearing office. I had to drive 90+ miles to this hearing, wait 2:45 hours for my hearing (because of idiotic scheduling problems), and deal with a 78 year old, half deaf ME who doesn’t know the first thing about my impairment. All the while my representative objected to nothing.

    Who is really looking out for the claimant? Apparently no one.