Social Security benefits for dependant children (page 2)

NewChapter

How in the world could this be understood as legal advice anyway? Moshe went to the SS office and learned that his minor kids qualified for benefits too. He suggested that everyone with eligible children should look into it. Telling people what benefits are available to them is not practicing law. If anything, it's praciticing social work! Moshe, do you have a license to practice social work?

Seriously, relaying one's experience so that others can benefit is not practicing law. Can only lawyers now recommened that a person look into government benefits? It's not even legal advice.

NC

NewChapter

And another thing . . . LOL

Moshe relayed the following rule:

Many people don't know this, but if you have a dependant child (some stipulations apply) under the age of 18 living in your home and you claim them on your tax return, you can get a social security check for them until they turn 18.

To which Aguest says: For example, what if someone's under age 18 kids already receive SSA benefits through another parent? What if they're receiving SSI?

So if you go to the SS office, and they run your child's ss#, they will know if another parent is claiming them as a dependent and will also know if another parent is collecting Ss on their behalf. I am still baffled at how relaying an experience and rules can be construed as legal advice.

NC

moshe

Yes, NC, double dipping is no longer an option for drawing social benefits-

moshe

A few years ago I was on ebay looking at VW dune buggy auctions and came across a nice one- with the comment from the owner that he was selling it, because they had adopted their grandchildren and they needed the money- I PM'd him , and told him about the dependant SS coverage- he got back with later- yes, SS told them they could get a check for both of the kids and they were getting a big check for past benefits. Was he ever happy- and I was, too.

oh, no- I was practicing law and could have given him bad advice!

AGuest

I'm sorry but I think you all may have missed my point (peace to you!). I closed with:

leaving to try and dig her tongue out of her cheek

In an effort to explain just HOW "tongue in cheek" my comments WERE! You know, so much that I had to DIG my tongue out?? But the error is mine. I don't let too many things get to me in life, but obviously (and I did say that on another thread), this matter (the differences that have occurred with myself and another poster lately) has. I am sorry that I wasn't clear... or, better yet, that I even commented on your obviously sincere and serious thread, dear Moshe (peace, dear one!). My apologies!

AGuest, I will file your warning in the same place as I file your spiritual advice--

Please, feel free and do so, dear one. That's kind of what it was intended for, anyway...

Again, peace to you all!

SA (who's gonna say she's still on her own, just now... which, again, is how I get myself into these things, though, of course -

Band on the Run

It become legal advice when you apply legal info. which anyone can provide to a specific fact pattern. SSA posts this info prominently. It is open to the public. I had a horror Social security lawyer dealing with my orphan facial pain. My case did not fit on their grids. If a case falls within the grids, SSA can perform a mechanical analysis. Since my illness was rare, I had to establish more. SSA denies cases like crazy. Merely appealing it with no new evidence seems to increase your chances greatly. I had a referral from NYU Law to an alumni. The retainer was very brief. I asked for more details and he said "we're all NYU, don't worry." I provided the lawyer with a practice manual, detailed legal memos, and witness statements. He prepared nothing in writing. The lawyer who showed up for my hearing knew nothing of my case.

SSA never made a determination. Legal services told me to get a writ of mandamus as in Marbury v. Madison, something I was too ill to do on my own and if I could, then I was not disabled. I wrote to my federal reps. The Democrat that I admired so much, a man of international reputation, did not even acknowledge my letter. The Republican who did embarassing things blew his top after three years of no action. If they denied me, I could appeal further. The Senator wrote a personal letter that was full of venom towards SSA. Suddenly, within two days of the Senator's letter, SSA granted me benefits.

Academics impart legal info. Community organizers do so. It is a good thing unless some general insight is applied to a particular case. When I messed up, I am certain my legal info was correct. I knew my subject. People were not calling for a college essay, however. They cared about their lives.

AGuest

They cared about their lives.

Sometimes, others... senators... and those who are not (yet) lawyers... care, too, dear BOTR (peace to you!). While others... including licensed attorneys (as you admit)... and even Legal Aid... do not.

I have more to say on this, but so as not to hijack dear Moshe's thread again (again, peace to you!), I have done so in a separate thread:

http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/members/adult/219281/1/Dear-BOTR-peace-to-you-and

Again, peace to you!

A slave of Christ,

SA

Terry

I think the Social Security Administration is very weird with all the subsidiary and ancillary benefits it offers beyond what FDR had in mind.

Amazing how entitlements have gotten out of control.

Not to mention the fact they keep blowing holes in the fund.

SixofNine

I think the Social Security Administration is very weird with all the subsidiary and ancillary benefits it offers beyond what FDR had in mind.

Where could I read more about this? (specifically, more about "what FDR had in mind")

kazar

The Senator wrote a personal letter that was full of venom towards SSA. Suddenly, within two days of the Senator's letter, SSA granted me benefits.

I've often heard it said that "it's not what you know but who you know".

Social Security benefits for dependant children

Share this