Give Someone Their Props

Drop everything. It's time to nominate someone for AIDS Legal Council's prestigious (and totally groovy) Advocates of the Year Award.

Every year we at ALCC honor folks in the community who have made a difference in the lives of people with HIV, whether through case management, volunteer activities, medical care, advocacy or philanthropy (sorry, there's no category for fashion sense). You can nominate someone by completing the nomination form, found here: http://www.aidslegal.com/Documents/Nominating_Form_2009.pdf.

We'll be handing out the awards at the fancy-shmancy Playboy Foundation on Tuesday, May 5. The deadline for nominations is January 30, 2009. So come on. Do it. Stop reading this post right now and nominate someone. Seriously.

If you have questions, contact Ricardo Cifuentes at the Council, 312.427.8990 or ricardo@aidslegal.com.

Yet Another Way to Not Get Your HIV Meds

File this one under "Can't Stand Up For Falling Down" (to quote the 60s soul duo Sam & Dave). You've probably heard of the AIDS Drug Assistance Program, or ADAP, run by the Illinois Department of Public Health. It provides free HIV medications to financially eligible people in Illinois through a pharmacy service called PharmaCare. It's a great program, run by friendly, responsible, hard-working people who genuinely care about serving people with HIV. The program even helps people who have private insurance with big copays; if you have 80/20 prescription drug coverage through your work-based health insurance, for example, your 20% drug copays could be a few hundred dollars a month. ADAP can pick up these costs.

But in recent months, we at AIDS Legal Council have been contacted by working people caught in an impossible predicament. They have health insurance through work with big copays, and ADAP is eager and willing to help them meet those costs -- but their insurance plans will not coordinate with PharmaCare. Their plans have exclusive contracts with other pharmacy services, direct competitors of PharmaCare. And since ADAP contracts exclusively with PharmaCare, ADAP can't help. So although these folks are "the lucky ones" with private health insurance, the unmanageable copays keep their life-saving drugs out of reach.

Lots of brainpower is being applied to this problem here at AIDS Legal Council (as well as at AIDS Foundation and Health and Disability Advocates). If you've got ideas, throw them our way.

Wonk Wonk Wonky Wonk

OK, I know all you policy-wonk types are just dying to know what the Social Security dollar amounts will be for 2009. If you have no idea what I'm talking about then you're not a wonk, you should be proud, and you needn't read another word of this post.

Here are a few important Social Security amounts for 2009. For people on SSI, the monthly benefit will be $674. For people on SSDI, the amount of money you can earn in a month before triggering a Trial Work Period month is $700. The amount of money you can earn each month and still keep your check after your Trial Work Period is $980 (that amount is known as 'substantial gainful activity,' or SGA). For those of you who want to know all of SSA's numbers for 2009, go here: http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/EDI/publications/colafacts2009.pdf

For those of you who'd like to understand what on earth all this is about, read our lovely legal guide "HIV and Public Benefits" here: http://www.aidslegal.com/Publications/Benefits_English.pdf

This has been our most boring blog post yet. Yet we make no apologies.

They're Not All Idiots After All

If you read our recent blog posting, "Idiots Still Run the Show," you're up-to-date on the travails of Linda, our client whose Social Security benefits were cut off -- and who got the Royal Runaround when she went to her local office (twice!) to try to fix the problem. Well, never let it be said that we at AIDS Legal Council of Chicago do nothing but gripe on this blog. This morning we went to the squeaky-clean Social Security office near Racine and Adams where they saw us ahead of our appointment time. We met with a friendly, patient, knowledgeable worker who fixed everything for us. Of course, the mountain of required paperwork took a solid 90 minutes to fill out. But we thought your cockles would be warmed to learn that sometimes a government worker is on the ball.

Stigma and Hysteria are Alive and Well in the Heartland

Surely you've read in numerous mainstream media reports that AIDS is now a "chronic, manageable" illness like diabetes or high cholesterol, thanks to advances in antiretroviral medications. Right. Consider the panic that hit Normandy High School in St. Louis last month when news spread that maybe -- maybe -- as many as 50 kids in the school might -- might -- have been exposed to HIV. Prom dates were cancelled. Parents from a different school worried that their football team shouldn't play against Normandy. Yeah, that's just how people would have responded if there had been an outbreak of diabetes at Normandy.

Astonishingly, the superintendent thought it necessary to send letters to 1,300 parents informing them the school was a possible cesspool of infection -- despite the fact that the Department of Health had confirmed exactly one infection. "We weren't trying to create mass hysteria and panic," the superintendent protested to the New York Times -- although short of setting Normandy on fire, it would be difficult to think of a more efficient way to create mass hysteria and panic. This chowderhead is in charge of a school?

And you wonder why the AIDS Legal Council wants to get rid of Illinois's stupid requirement that schools be informed when their students test HIV-positive. You wonder why the AIDS Legal Council opposes the CDC's recommendation that HIV testing be done "routinely," without specific, written consent from patients.

If you want to read a good story about the incident, click here: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/09/us/09hiv.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Idiots Still Run the Show

Ever get the feeling that government bureaucrats make it up as they go along? Here's a recent case that will confirm those feelings.

Our client Linda (not her real name) has been receiving Social Security disability benefits for several years. In 2004 Linda started doing some part-time work. Then in 2007 her health got worse, and she had to quit. She didn't report any of the income to Social Security like she was supposed to, so it wasn't until last month that Social Security figured out that she had been working while receiving benefits (probably the Social Security computer cross-checked with the IRS computer). So Linda got a notice that her benefits were being cut off because her income was too high. Social Security couldn't know that Linda had already stopped working, and therefore her check shouldn't stop, so their mistake is understandable.

Their subsequent screw-ups, however, are not. When Linda got the notice that her check was cut off, she immediately went to the local office to see what she could do. What should have happened? Well, Social Security has a program for people in Linda's situation, called Expedited Reinstatement (EXR). Under EXR, if your check stops because of earned income and you inform Social Security within five years that you are no longer working, your check is supposed to start up again while Social Security determines if you are still entitled to disability benefits. Moreover, Social Security regulations say that when people like Linda go into the office, they "must be informed of all their filing options, including the option to request EXR." Sounds simple, no?

Well, no one at the local office bothered to tell Linda about EXR. And of course, Linda didn't know to ask about it (would you?). Instead they told her that she had to file a new application for benefits -- in essence, to start over from scratch.

She contacted me the next day, and I told her I was pretty darn sure that she had a right to file for EXR. To double check, I called a Social Security worker I know (one who is completely on the ball) and he told me I was right. In addition, he sent an email to the office Linda had visited instructing them to change her application to EXR.

Problem solved? Are you kidding?

I told Linda that if she wanted to go to the office and make sure they had done everything right, it wouldn't be a bad idea (Linda is one of those amazing clients who has no hesitancy to knock on any door to get what she needs). Well, she went back to the local office, and she was told that she was no longer eligible for EXR because she had already filed a new application for benefits -- despite a specific Social Security regulation that says you can file for both at the same time.

To add to the mess, the worker also told Linda that she could have filed for EXR if she had come into the office within ten days of losing her benefits. This is pure nonsense for two reasons: 1) Linda did come into the office within ten days, and 2) Linda has five years to ask for EXR.

I know what you're thinking. Everyone confuses ten days with five years.

Anyway, our plan now is to walk hand-in hand with Linda to a different Social Security office, preferably one not staffed by pinheads. We'll bring along a stack of Social Security regulations and hopefully fix this problem lickety-split. Pray for us.