Get Alert
Please Wait... Processing your request... Please Wait.
You must sign in to sign-up for alerts.

Please confirm that your email address is correct, so you can successfully receive this alert.

Letters to the Editor   |    
Psychiatric Illness and Income Support
Am J Psychiatry 2009;166:1065-1065. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2009.09050648

To the Editor: In their commentary published in the April 2009 issue of the Journal, Sheldon Danziger, Ph.D., et al. (1) noted that the percentage of Social Security awards to people with diagnoses of mental illness has increased substantially since 1984. The authors raised the question as to whether these increased numbers reflect good or bad policy in the approval of Social Security awards. However, I question the basic assumption that the changed numbers actually reflect Social Security policy or any change in the application of policy.

There are at least three other unexplored explanations for the increase in Social Security awards for individuals with diagnoses of mental illness during these particular years. First, the increase in awards may reflect the laudable increase in accurate psychiatric diagnoses that has made it less likely for a patient to receive a physical diagnosis, neglecting necessary psychiatric care. Second, it could reflect a greater willingness on the part of patients and physicians to face down stigma and seek psychiatric treatment. Third, it might even be a result of the fact that while early treatment allows many more people with serious psychiatric diagnoses to enter the workplace, inconsistent support of treatment and outdated workplace policies often drive these workers back to public support programs.

Therefore, rather than trying to understand how or whether to refine award policies, it might be more useful to determine which healthcare funding mechanisms support the extended treatment necessary to maintain work function in people with mental disorders and clarify which workplace and treatment supports could keep individuals with serious mental illness in the workplace. As demonstrated with welfare reform, education and employment were more effective than refining eligibility rules and procedures.

1.Danziger S, Frank RG, Meara E: Mental illness, work, and income support programs. Am J Psychiatry 2009; 166:398–404


+The authors report no competing interests.

+This letter (doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2009.09050648) was accepted for publication in June 2009.



1.Danziger S, Frank RG, Meara E: Mental illness, work, and income support programs. Am J Psychiatry 2009; 166:398–404

CME Activity

There is currently no quiz available for this resource. Please click here to go to the CME page to find another.
Submit a Comments
Please read the other comments before you post yours. Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest.
Comments are moderated and will appear on the site at the discertion of APA editorial staff.

* = Required Field
(if multiple authors, separate names by comma)
Example: John Doe

Related Content
The American Psychiatric Publishing Textbook of Geriatric Psychiatry, 4th Edition > Chapter 8.  >
APA Practice Guidelines > Chapter 0.  >
APA Practice Guidelines > Chapter 0.  >
Textbook of Traumatic Brain Injury, 2nd Edition > Chapter 33.  >
Dulcan's Textbook of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry > Chapter 30.  >
Topic Collections
Psychiatric News
PubMed Articles