By Sarah Mays, Supervising Attorney
Our client Clarissa (fictitious name) was 13 years old when her parent called our hotline in April 2025 requesting assistance with a public benefits issue. Clarissa had been receiving Supplemental Security Income benefits since she was two years old due to her attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and asthma and had alarmingly received notice that the Social Security Administration (SSA) cut off her benefits, as it concluded that Clarissa’s condition had improved and thus she was no longer disabled.
In actuality, not only did Clarissa continue to suffer from ADHD and asthma, but she also struggled with severe mental health impairments, including ongoing Major Depressive Disorder with recurrent suicidal ideation, self-harming behaviors, multiple psychiatric hospitalizations, disordered eating , and emotional dysregulation. Accordingly, we in the Community Legal Aid SoCal Public Benefits Unit agreed to represent Clarissa at her appeals hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ).
Formulating legal arguments for disability
As Public Benefits Unit advocates Tessa Oliver, Esther Gomez, and I worked to develop the evidence of the case and formulate our legal argument for disability, it became clear that SSA had based their adverse decision on the unsupported opinions of a few one-time mental health evaluations ordered by SSA and conducted by state agency medical examiners and consultants, which erroneously concluded that our client had no significant mental impairments. Our legal strategy was to persuade the ALJ to afford little weight to the unfavorable opinions that Clarissa was not disabled and to highlight the substantial evidence from her ongoing, regular treatment providers demonstrating the severity of her condition.
Trauma-informed legal services
The Public Benefits Unit is particularly proud of the empathetic and trauma-informed legal services we delivered to our client, as Clarissa endured repeated psychiatric hospitalizations for suicidal attempts and ideations throughout our legal representation for her appeal. Our approach required us to zealously advocate while remaining sensitive to our client’s needs concerning a delicate and personal topic and during a time of significant instability for her.
The hearing
Ultimately, at the May 2026 Hearing, the ALJ agreed with Tessa’s arguments that the several unfavorable mental health evaluations conducted by state agency medical examiners and consultants were unsupported and inconsistent with a detailed review of the record. The ALJ gave weight to Clarissa’s treatment providers and to the SSA-employed medical expert who testified at the hearing, concluding that the expert’s testimony that the client was disabled is supported by her significant history of depressive symptoms, including suicidal ideation and deliberate self-harm, all of which were clearly evidenced in the record.
As a result, Clarissa was entitled to approximately $22,034 in backpay and will continue to receive ongoing monthly benefits of $1,064, which supports her ongoing care and medical treatment, much to the relief of her parent.
