The ALJ also failed to discuss any of the lay evidence within the record and the possibility of its applicability to a retrospective diagnosis. When a claimant is attempting to utilize medical evidence to support a retrospective diagnosis, the ALJ must consider all of the evidence in the record as a whole. These provisions set forth a special procedure for mental health claims at each level of administrative review. Failure on the part of the ALJ to complete a PTRF and attach the form to the ALJ decision combined with improper sequential step analysis requires a remand. The ALJ decision denotes no discussion of these special procedures, and no mention of a PRTF is made aside from the rejection of the information submitted by Muldavin because it was on such a form.
Remand is appropriate.
For this reason, the court need not address the other contentions made by Platt.