particular case but with a i would say a very different twist this is a woman who's twenty nine years old she's completed nine years of special education she kind of drifts between moberly and columbia public schools which is not by itself a good thing the issue of another impairment is rather easily met because in march of two thousand and nine she had surgery for school the o's they have fused nine vertebra added screws and hardware that hold those in place she has worked three days in her life and i have tomato canning factory in her backyard the issue for the court is whether the climate meets twelve o five c and the reason i think this is so interesting is  you will find cases in this circuit that say here's the desk do you have an i q before age twenty two sometimes even inferred you have to have the test seventy or below it's considered to be permanent at sixteen and you have no severe impairment there are also other cases that talk about the adaptive  issues and that is what i think is so interesting about this case and the placement that continually comes up as in the listing it it states and i quote from listing two of fives to see intellectual disability first a significant way sab average general an intellectual functioning with deficit's and adaptive functioning a manifested during the developmental period the evidence demonstrates or support onset of impairment before age twenty two now it is read by some chords as that's what the low i child she watches t v she talks to friends on the phone it's the only case i have ever been involved with in which there is a specific test administered to determine the well i think it's procedure are except that this is our opportunity at age fourteen that she is tested by the schools for her adaptive abilit and as found at page two seventy seven of the transcript the test says that if you have a score of seven or below that means there's a problem out of ten tests she scores an eleven j she's course they want she is as bad as you can be so in this case i think we shift to the question of her adaptive abilities at age fourteen we're terrible and that doesn't have any to do with i q you can give that to anybody as to how well you adapt but at fourteen she didn't adapt at all now how does the l j find that she became one says she's going to follow the rules and talk about communication of care home living social and personal skills use there's no evidence that she improved with any of these things now there's there's also the issue of using those what do you what about the argument that the deficit  manifested necessarily requires the ael j and reviewing courts to look beyond the childhood period because the disability claim of course is being made as an adult for benefits because you can't great in that it's not conclusive the other way either and that's where johnson comes into play because in johnson we held that if there are two inconsistent the views of the of the evidence free world  we must i asked her how i think that would be a good argument if these requests should in the six seven eight category they are not these are all far as i was i was trying to address your say what i thought was your main theme is this is a child adult plane and that a l j messed up by looking at at her and her adult cousin doll when all you're supposed to do is look at people and from the  v the court says they would need to be and it is to shit so by themselves those rudimentary issues of day to day living do not by deficit's an adaptive functioning kind and that's in the preamble of the listing that has to be shown in order for an individual to meet the listing and in this case like in many cases and in the security disability context there is some conflicting evidence that just highlights the role of the ale jaysus the ale j there at the hearing who's the finder of fact and the interplay between that and the substantial evidence standard which says to two reasonable fact finders could look at the same facts and come to a different conclusion but as long as one of those conclusions would support the decision of the commissioner under the substantial evidence standard the court is going to appeal in this case i think jason is clearly supported by substantial evidence so when we're talking about adaptive functioning what are we talking about we're really talking about how well a person handles common demands in life ordinary living and how independent they are compared to other people of his similar age and background and in the decision they really went through and discussed a lot of the evidence both testimonial evidence that the appellate report at the hearing which she reported in function reports as well as  test results and school records all of which show that are adaptive functioning was was generally in the normal range in terms of her testimony what she reported about her day like today's it's very critical in this case she lived independently she lived by herself with her young child when she was raising that in and of itself reflects a very significant part unimpaired level of adaptive functioning she was able to drive could prepare meals she go shopping virus self she could count change she had some trouble reading that certainly reflected but you could use a check book she could read well enough to get on the computer use facebook write letters in terms of her social interaction which also falls under deaf to functioning she was able to leave her home on a regular basis you visit with friends on a regular basis and she had a close relationship with the relatives all this evidence supports the algaes finding concerning her death function at the testing that was performed there in the role of period there was a constant state of psychological evaluation was performed and the psychologist declined to make a formal diagnosis based on that testing alone but indicated that her the results of the testing indicated a learning disability she did not indicate that it reflected intellectual disability or mental retardation that's important because those diagnoses included in those diagnoses is of is a finding inherent finding that there are deficits of the data functioning that's not what the consulting psychologist found and then also going back and looking at the school records here in particular is where there is some conflict in the evidence  but there were there was a disagreement between school districts in this case about what her diagnosis was one school district indicated that she she should be diagnosed as mentally retarded which is the nomenclature used at that time now the regulations use new actual disability and as i said before that would include that reflects significant deficits and up to function another school district said no that's wrong based on our testing we think she just has a learning disorder and that that's consistent with the old days ultimate decision as i said there was some conflicting evidence on some occasions one of the school districts did indicate that she had mental retardation and heavily relies on this a b s he calls it a test the assessment that was made as we discussed in our brief is not really a test it's more of a survey of parents teachers those kinds of things to get multiple perspectives on a child's functioning in this case the record shows that was ultimately only completed by one person and is absolutely true the that one person did indicate that she had very severe adaptive limitations but we can't just rely on that one piece of evidence of the role the l g to weigh all of the evidence in the record and all that evidence not just the school records but also for the evidence relating to a current functioning and ghastly cases that's absolutely true we certainly didn't cite those to suggest that the facts of this case were similar to those cases not at all however the johnson case had been as you mentioned looking at that case in this case they're almost that claim it had been assessed at various times with mental retardation like this case but then there are also conflicting diagnoses in john's and their diagnoses them for line in lecture functioning which means we don't have a right that was not a child adult claim know this and i believe that person was somewhat older but the same rules would apply i thought i thought a challenge dog claim is is basically someone who who has never worked in claims impairment so is there any difference in looking at those two types of well i know there's not the adults listing criteria used in both of those cases the difference between a child this is a trap adult disability case is that the amount of benefits  turning back to the johnson case as in this case she'd been in special education she left school even earlier than the opponent in this case she left school i think in one theory because she was having a child again like that but in this case she'd never worked again like this case so the fact she didn't work isn't necessarily determinative in that case like this case she left school at a child but in johnson again like this case she had the same kind of activities normal household duties could go out the community go shopping don't change that kind of thing i just think that based on the court's previous holding in johnson this case represents almost the exact same act pattern and this court affirmed in johnson so we respect class that you firm in this case and just briefly i know that mr harland clarify this in his statement but we look at the entire record in terms of functioning while th manifested during the developmental period it's entirely proper for the l g to look at the current functioning because that's presumed to go forward because somebody who has an election a disability their functioning is not going to change over time and in this case the other look both that are going functioning i had a good reason as to why i went back there and sat down to tell you that i don't know but i think i can do this very quickly page seven eighteen  brief she had a ranking eighth grade of one sixty five out of one hundred sixty six children diagnosis was mental retardation page two fifty eight part two of the administrative record the other that i think that is important it's found page fifty eight of our brief sides to the west we could be the of sixty nine the other is the last sentence reports from teacher observations further indicate that porridge has adaptive behavior issues they're not just relying on the test which is