i'll try to help you ok well your honor in this case the critical time period my the it is between ages of eighteen and twenty two of this application actually was filed back in may of zero nine a few months shy of her eighteenth birthday and we need for the child insurance disability benefits to establish disability before age twenty two now from our perspective the two main pieces of pinion evidence for that time period is from post vocational expert resulted in testimony that would preclude work dr thurber's record opinions were also construed as consistent with those of the consultative examiner which  scores which were in the low to borderline range and emotional functioning test those are two tests out of twelve that the a l j focused on and rejected but did not appreciate the battery of testing the it was a i believe ports and no ability to well those were i believe simple maintain attention and concentration for to our segments asked simple questions or requests assists in and make simple work related decisions those report and then from dr third they were they were what from dr thurber who is again they're treating psychiatrist from ages seventeen to nineteen we also have severe from doctor wit severe limitations in  days of testing in september of two thousand and thirteen yeah i think eighteen twenty third which again is within ten days of or twenty second birthday so the timing is exactly where we need to be he was the one who administered the test there was the one who saw her repeatedly reassess treating physician and you know evidence what happens can you point to in the record that trance noncompliance with medication is a symptom of her illness well the decisions she makes in life are that and this is something that i think was severely overlooked as the third party evidence from dr from gloria mill skills she describes are very very accurately in my opinion she was says she she acts like a thirteen year old in many ways she doesn't brush your teeth without prompting she will not bathe more than once a week without prompting she makes these decisions she was not going to take medication unless somebody puts it in front of or she will not go to doctors unless someone puts her in the congo she's that maturity level of decision making and no no doctor has said she's not compliant because of these poor decisions but the approach her actions speak volumes as it's clear she has number of issues but she was enroll at a community college and held a part time job so i'm just trying to see how that reconciles with your statement that her daily activities support her being totally disabled well as far as the school i think i've covered that in the brief hopefully with a little well received humor but she attended classes she did not succeed was not reaso times oh no no she took tight she and some and she did take an english class never succeeded anyone can enroll in a local community college and she should be commended for that you know never get any credit for any credit i don't think she completed any anything and she certainly hasn't made any progress any kind of aid agree if that's what you're asking but she tried and failed and same with this job is is the hardest thing for me to swallow this was job with a job coach assigned through try counties regional center who helps people with disabilities try to integrate into the world and she had to do that with a job coach folding napkins putting silverware together and folding them up and needed a job coach to do that and she still didn't succeed and we have an r f c finding for simple routine tasks it does not get any more simple routine than that and she couldn't do it without assistance of an assigned job coach he she had to have him pick her up a lot of the times to routine tasks occasional public and coworkers and we have even the c e has more specific limitations than are then are integrated into sets or general treating physicians so that she could concentrate on older attention for two earlier actually if you look at the opinions of judge sorry dr thurber and dr milestone claimant completely ignores the actual synthesis of the doctor's own findings titled medical source of the administrative record moderately limited in the ability to maintain concentration for two hours dr milestone found in even lesser doctor there were also in terms of limitations s poor i mean classified her as poor is that right yes your honor doctor said you know she maintain attention for to our segment make simple work related decisions ask simple questions or request assistance he also noted she's likely to be absent from work three times a month and often suffers from deficiency of concentration persistence or things resulting in they are to time to complete tasks we are sure know well two things in regards to the three days  specifically rejected that portion which i can address if your honor would like however in terms of the general opinion there was indeed the checkbox imitation that your friend to have sixteen categories but the doctor thurber a synthesize that opinion in the summary medical source that mental findings conclude that despite those checked off limitations that claim is no more than moderately limited in specific abilities such as to maintain attention for two hour spans complete simple tasks and handle ordinary work stress this is on five o eight and claim it does not address the fact that this is dr thurber's own statement and own synthesis of her treatment records and so the l g did not in correctly conclude that dr  to still still very impaired and you know adult life skills and social skills it's after the sixteen check box for if you continue i believe it's twenty i saw that but i'm looking at what he wrote so when you take the checkbox in and you can hear you your you don't know what kind of scale he's using really on the check box but when you read his words you know what he's saying well it to the extent that there's and any ambiguity the ail j did reasonably interpret you know the check box scale includes you know mild moderate i believe market an extreme i still don't areas i don't understand how that's consistent and that's what we're looking for to see whether or not the ale chain and whether his decisions were supported by specific legitimity reasons and i'm having a little moderately limited or by a limited this is consistent with dr port last conclusions also finding for example moderate limited limitations and confirmation persistent pace and  when you're through oh sorry yes and so if you look at the synthesis of dr thurber's opinion and compare it with the conclusion of dr horton off they both found you know mild to moderate limitations and that is why the l j found them consistent again the medical source taman of some she has significant limitations the question is whether the record supports a total inability to do work even though she has had no pastoral work if i could point to your honor's a significant issue in this case is the claimants ability to perform work when she was compliant with medications let me point you to the longitudinal treatment history briefly you know in two thousand and seven two thousand and eight they claim it was complying with treatment it was noted to be doing very well emotionally engaging better more socially focused less moody right around the time and this is on page three sixty seven three sixty eight now right around the time dr thurber and dr milestone issued their opinions it may twentieth eleven klayman reported that she was feeling great on medications and attending a job training program regularly in july two thousand and eleven clment continues to continue on prescription doing well and report that she was frustrated she could not find a job in october two thousand and eleven she appears to be doing well the doctor said she had no obvious situation or  emotional challenge was in role that venture a college and was taking three courses including psychology this is significant because college attention finished those courses then there was no evidence that she completed agreed on your shoes and rolled in a lot of different courses as you heard reference to one of them not sure that that is sufficient for i think what you're trying to say i was looking at dr opinion looks like the of claimants actual bill of these dr graph on page two fifty six question whether claim was actually development disabled and dr portnoy off found that claimants averaged verbal and perceptual i q scores inappropriate for a primary b f diagnosis so what the l d is trying to say is that doctor would rejected these testing i q scores which are contrary to these three other doctors that found if anything they to be a mild underestimate and in fact gave other actually had said what you said maybe so but that's what the n t was trying to say he didn't really i don't know if you really said it but let me ask you one last question for your time is up what were the specific reasons testimony dr parser noted that claimants and gloria stills was very specifically concerned that she'd been rejected for s s d i now has a lawyer that the family wants her to be in treatment and at the administer of hearing she specifically agreed that she had been one of the driving forces in trying what did the ail chasing what did the l j c l g explicitly said that this thing was rejected because the late witnesses are less reliable than the physicians and mental health professionals and are less likely to be influenced you well picking up on that that last point neurological psychological examinations over two days cost money we have a mother who's on and off welfare and we were fortunate to have an aunt  step up and get the testing she needed that was extremely revealing and it framed the timeframe exactly how we needed it right before age twenty two we have the evidence from age eighteen we had the evidence from age twenty two family member testimony in every case of that was seen as a valid germane reason as far as the accusation the doctor with found the testing invalid that's not the proper context of the invalid and i'm just go have to refer you to page one seventy five the excerpt record for the full context of that quote as far as the synthesis argument we have a one form has twenty five specifics and then the social theory one page form has eight or seven pacific limitations we do have a conflict i'm not using either of these forms anymore but on one there was a moderate attention and then on the other we have four to none but i do believe it was correct in looking at the narrative explanations and that puts it in the correct context and that to be quite frank the synthesis argument is nothing articulated by the l j this is post hoc rationalization that should be rejected the only specific thing that the judge rejected from dr thurber is the missing three days a month the rest just totally overlook and characterize it as at most moderate limitations which is not an accurate representation of your opinion thank you very much and i thank you