What Bird v. Social Security Administration (SSA) Teaches About Disability Onset

In Bird v. Commissioner of Social Security (2012), the Fourth Circuit held that VA disability ratings must be given “substantial weight” in SSA disability determinations. The case highlights a common challenge: while institutions often define "disability" by their own methods posttraumatic stress and other trauma-related disorders often begin at a definable event and fluctuate over time.

Injury as an Anchor Point

Trauma- and Stressor Related Disorder, definitionally, begin at or near the time of the preceding traumatic event. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, 5th Edition (DSM-5) specifies that full criteria for PTSD can be met as early as one month post-incident, with delayed expression possible up to six months or more. Anchoring onset at the injury or discharge date reflects clinical logic, even if administrative bodies choose to assign arbitrary or institutional defined "effective" dates for compensation.

The DSM-5 explicitly acknowledges that symptom severity can wax and wane. This fluctuation should not be equated with absence of disorder. An individual may have periods of relative stability alongside periods of marked impairment, yet still meet criteria for a chronic diagnosis.

Institutional vs. Clinical Definitions

The Social Security Administration (SSA) defines disability as an inability to perform substantial gainful activity; Veterans Affairs uses percentage ratings tied to impairment severity. Neither definition is a statement about clinical onset and simply administrative constructs applied after impairment is already present.

It is rare for individuals to apply for benefits on the exact date disabling symptoms begin. More often, there is a lag of months or years while they attempt to cope or while impairment worsens. Applications typically reflect recognition of persistence or escalation, not the true onset of illness.

Determining Onset

When arguing onset, frame the injury or discharge date as the likely clinical onset supported by DSM-5 timing rules, and treat later SSA/VA administrative dates as eligibility thresholds rather than medical truth. This opens room to argue that impairment predated the application window, even if the court requires a precise administrative onset date for benefits.