Read “Delayed & denied: How Social Security leaves gun violence survivors behind” here.
In the second article of our series on the financial impacts of gun violence, we examine gun violence survivors’ struggles in navigating the Social Security system.
Social Security disability benefits are designed to provide a safety net for Americans with severe mental and physical disabilities who are no longer able to work. There are two programs: Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI), an insurance program that provides benefits to disabled workers who have paid into the system as an employee, and Supplemental Security Income (SSI), a needs-based program designed for disabled people who have very low income and assets.
Our reporting details how gun violence survivors struggle to access Social Security disability benefits, despite the physical and/or mental pain they experience while working after a violence-related injury. Most applicants to Social Security endure a months-long application process that ends in a denial. In 2022, only 38% of applicants were approved at the initial application stage. The subsequent appeals process can add months or even years to the wait.
“You can’t have people waiting like this. Livelihoods are on the line, bills are coming like clockwork,” said one gun violence survivor whose disability application is pending.
Those who are awarded benefits often find that they are not enough to cover their expenses, or save for the future.
“Often, when you’re applying for Social Security disability, you look at it as a beacon of hope. And then when you get approved, a lot of people do see it as, ‘Well, now I’m approved, but I still have a mortgage, or a car payment, or something. This is not going to be enough,’” said Shivam Patel, a Social Security disability attorney.
Here are the key findings from our report.
Applying for Social Security is a demanding process
Social Security’s eligibility requirements are more stringent than most of America’s peer nations. For an applicant to qualify, Social Security must determine that their disability will prevent them from working for at least one year, or will result in death.
To apply, claimants must submit identity documents, employment history, and medical records, all of which involves resources that some applicants don’t have. For example, some don’t have adequate healthcare, which makes it challenging to get up-to-date medical records. Others have fallen into homelessness, making it difficult to gather the necessary paperwork.
Long wait times mean applicants can go months or years with little income.
On average, it takes applicants about seven and a half months to receive an initial decision, and appealing a denial adds months or years to the process. In total, it takes applicants an average of almost two years to get a final ruling.
During this time, Social Security applicants must remain under the “substantial gainful activity” threshold the SSA uses to help determine whether an applicant is disabled. In 2024, applicants who are working and earning more than $1,550 per month do not qualify for benefits.
“Let’s say you are a person that’s the sole provider for your family and you’ve had this injury. You’re going to run into some unique challenges on what to do. That’s often why people return to work—because they don’t have any other option,” said disability attorney Ashley Sappenfield.
Gun violence survivors face unique challenges
Patel and Sappenfield, who have both represented gun violence survivors, said that in their experience, these applicants face two unique challenges compared to their other clients. First, the survivors they represented tended to be younger—in general, three out of five victims of nonfatal shootings are under 30. Younger applicants have a harder time getting approved for Social Security.
“The younger you are, the higher the scrutiny is [about whether] you’ll be unable to return to the workforce,” Sappenfield said.
Second, the lawyers noticed that gun violences survivors often attempt to return to work after being shot, which can also hurt their applications.
“If you have someone that returns to work, maybe for a number of years, and then physically isn’t able to continue, or maybe mentally—it’s a lot harder to connect the two things, because from Social Security’s perspective, they think, ‘Well you’ve returned to work. What is worse now than it was when you initially returned?’” Sappenfield said.
The benefits are not enough
The two main benefits awarded to successful Social Security disability applicants are monthly cash payments and enrollment in government health insurance. While the gun violence survivors interviewed noted the importance of health care coverage, many said the cash benefits were too low.
The U.S. provides among the lowest disability benefits compared to peer countries: The average monthly payment for an individual on SSDI is $1,537, just above the federal poverty level for a single person. The average payment for an individual on SSI is $697, which is well below the poverty line.
Ralph Norman, who was shot and paralyzed at 17 years old, currently receives $976 a month in benefits. “That little check is like nothing,” he said. “You pay your rent, you buy food, you pay cable and cellphone—that check is gone.”
Partial disability is a potential solution
Because of the low benefits, some Social Security recipients consider returning to work after adjusting to their disability—but for the most part, Social Security recipients cannot work while receiving benefits, because once they earn over a certain amount ($1,550 a month in 2024), Social Security can reduce or revoke their benefits.
This quandary results from the fact that Social Security uses a binary, “all or nothing” approach to disability. Other countries use a more flexible definition by operating what is known as a partial disability system. Sweden, for example, assesses disability on a percentage scale (25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% disabled). This method allows disability recipients who are deemed to have a partial disability to work and receive disability benefits.
“All the systems have pros and cons,” said Na Yin, a professor at Baruch College and co-director of the New York Retirement and Disability Research Center. “But in terms of how to retain people’s ability, not only focusing on their disability, I think [this is] something more forward-looking, more respectful for people’s willingness to work, and keeping people’s attachment to the labor force, and their dignity in making a living.”