Opinion ID: 575280
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Polaski Analysis

Text: 17 The ALJ's second opinion lists a number of reasons why Miller's claims of disabling pain lack credibility. However, the ALJ did not properly apply the Polaski criteria in rejecting Miller's claim. Ultimately, the ALJ disregarded Miller's complaints of pain because they were not supported by objective medical evidence. However, not only must Miller's claims lack support in the medical record--they also must be inconsistent with the record as a whole. Brown v. Sullivan, 902 F.2d 1292, 1294 (8th Cir.1990).
18 In accordance with Polaski, the ALJ analyzed Miller's lifestyle. Miller claimed in both hearings that, after she became disabled, she spent most of her days lying down with a heating pad watching television, getting up only to do traction therapy or small chores. The ALJ stated that Miller admitted her husband is a fireman. Therefore, he works 24 hours and is off 48 hours. During the time that he is working, claimant is alone at home. She is responsible for meal preparation, etc. This blunts the previous impression as to a marked change in lifestyle. II AR at 252. Miller may prepare her own meals or perform small household chores in her husband's absence. However, a claimant need not spend all of her time in bed or be unable to perform chores to suffer disabling pain. See Ludden v. Bowen, 888 F.2d 1246, 1248 (8th Cir.1989). We do not believe Miller's modest activities conflict with her allegations of pain.
19 In considering Miller's descriptions of her pain, the ALJ chose to contrast Miller's claim that she experiences constant pain with her statements to Dr. Rooney, who stated that Miller described her pain as intermittent. Dr. Rooney also stated that Miller has also noted occasional radiation of pain into the right thumb and index finger and left little finger, again on an intermittent basis. I AR at 190. The ALJ concluded that Miller's allegation lacked credibility because  '[i]ntermittent' and 'occasional' are not the same as 'constant.'  II AR at 252. 20 However, when we read Dr. Rooney's letter to Dr. Jones, we see that Dr. Rooney stated that Miller had significant neck pains with intermittent exacerbation.  Later, Dr. Rooney described Miller's pain as chronic. 1 Also, Miller herself admitted that although she suffers some degree of pain constantly, she has good days and bad days and on good days she can go to the grocery store or perform small chores at home. I AR at 66-67. We fail to see inconsistency between Miller's description of her pain to the ALJ and the way she described her pain to Dr. Rooney and other physicians.
21 Dr. Jones prescribed Miller Darvocet, a strong pain killer, for Miller's back pain. Miller and the ALJ agree that Miller does not suffer any side effects from Darvocet when she takes the prescribed amount. 22 As required by Polaski, the ALJ also examined Miller's other treatment modalities. Miller stated that she needs a walker to assist her in standing up and getting around the house. The ALJ found that Miller's claim to need a walker lacks credibility because no walker has been prescribed. However, Dr. Jones prescribed a walker for Miller on December 17, 1986. II AR at 350. Miller also stated that she relies heavily on a home traction unit to relieve her neck and back pain. The ALJ stated that her claim to need such a unit lacked credibility because no unit has been prescribed by a doctor. However, the ALJ never asked Miller for specific documentation regarding the home traction unit. The ALJ has a duty to develop the record fully and fairly and should have sought specific documentation from Miller if he felt that her credibility rested on whether a doctor had prescribed her such a unit. See Bishop v. Sullivan, 900 F.2d 1259, 1262 (8th Cir.1990); Sykes v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 284, 287 (8th Cir.1988). Miller claims that doctors at the Mayo Clinic instructed her on the unit's use in July 1984. A letter from Dr. Krueger to Dr. Garcia dated August 14, 1984, in which Dr. Krueger described Miller's admission at St. Mary's Hospital for intensive physical medicine and rehabilitation, corroborates Miller's claim. I AR at 120. Given that some evidence in the record may support Miller's claim that the Mayo Clinic prescribed her home traction unit, we cannot hold that her inability to present written documentation of a prescription for the unit constitutes substantial evidence that her claims of pain lack credibility. 23 The ALJ did not examine the third and fifth factors of the Polaski test regarding precipitating and aggravating factors, and functional restrictions, and we see no substantial evidence in the record suggesting that Miller's claims of pain lack credibility with regard to those factors.