• toomanypancakes
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    1 year ago

    Because you still have eyesight in the other eye, so in social security’s mind there’s jobs in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (the DOT) you could still perform, and if there’s three jobs you could perform despite your impairment you aren’t disabled. Also, if you’re under 50 you almost certainly aren’t disabled for some reason. It’s maddening.

    • Echolynx@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      A lot of states don’t even care if you’ve only got so-so vision in one eye and are completely blind in the other. No stereopsis, no problem! Here’s a driver’s license. Good luck.

      • gAlienLifeform
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Here’s a driver’s license. Good luck. Now get to work you lazy bum!

      • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I would absolutely not be comfortable driving with vision in only one eye. It isn’t just depth perception, but you are losing significant field of vision.

    • MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s bonkers, in the UK I’m technically disabled because i have tinnitus and ADHD. (I still work like anyone else, but I have protected rights because of my status)