It looks like commenting on the dramatic rise in Social Security disability rolls has turned into something of a fad. James Ledbetter has a piece in Slate that is highly critical of the program’s structural disincentives that dissuade people with disabilities from rejoining the workforce. He’s particularly interested in the growing number of people with mental illness who are receiving SSDI (the wonky acronym for Social Security disability benefits). He writes:
Perhaps more important, SSDI in its current incarnation is a moral and economic tragedy: We are paying millions of presumably otherwise fit mentally ill people to stay out of the workforce for the rest of their productive lives. And this at a time when mental illness is more treatable than it ever has been. When Congress passed the Americans With Disabilities Act, it established several overarching principles, including equality of opportunity, full participation, and economic self-sufficiency. SSDI, regardless of its good intentions, is public policy that pushes “disabled” people in precisely the opposite direction.
I’m a little troubled by his use of “disabled”–I’m picturing him etching quotation marks in the air with his fingers while rolling his eyes. Mental illness can be a significant barrier to returning to work for many people. I have no doubt that many are capable of working, but employers generally do a poor job of accommodating mental illness in the workplace. Any redesign of SSDI is going to have to be accompanied by a committed effort to place workers in jobs that suit their abilities and to instruct employers on best practices for accommodating a wide range of disabilities. Otherwise, we’re just yanking the safety net out from under people who might not be completely ready to stand on their own.
