Court Opinion

ID: 9472924
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 04:15:03.123801+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:43:13.931119
License: Public Domain

GEE, Circuit Judge,
specially concurring:
Although I do not dissent from the panel’s disposition, I believe that in cases in which a social security claimant who has suffered no end-organ damage is disabled by alcoholism that appears to be uncontrollable it is preferable to condition an award of disability benefits upon the claimant’s undergoing treatment for his alcoholism, if such treatment is reasonably available. See Adams v. Weinberger, 548 F.2d 239, *506245-46 (8th Cir.1977); Sharpe v. Califano, 438 F.Supp. 1282, 1286 (E.D.Va.1977).1
This practice comports with the reasoning underlying 20 C.F.R. § 404.1530 (1984), which denies benefits to a claimant who refuses to follow a prescribed treatment that can restore his ability to work. See Adams, 548 F.2d at 246. Medical science cannot predict perfectly those alcoholics who can be cured and those who cannot. Ironically, a claimant who states that he cannot control his drinking may be viewed as a better prospect for rehabilitation than one who refuses to acknowledge his drinking problem. See Annot., 39 A.L.R.Fed. 182, 192 (1978). In these circumstances, I am reluctant to conclude from a history of failed recovery attempts that a claimant’s alcoholism is irremediable. It is true that "[sjome alcoholics can stop; more cannot.” Griffis v. Weinberger, 509 F.2d 837, 838 n. 1 (9th Cir.1975). We shall never know into which category Mr. Ferguson falls if we relieve him of the responsibility of continuing his efforts at recovery.

. Compare the requirement of 42 U.S.C. § 1382(e)(3)(A) (1982), implemented by regulations at 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.1720, 416.1725 (1984), that a disabled recipient of Supplemental Security Income who is an alcoholic must undergo treatment in order to maintain his eligibility for SSI. See McShea v. Schweiker, 700 F.2d 117, 119-120 (3d Cir.1983).