20 C.F.R. § 404.1530

Need to follow prescribed treatment

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) What treatment you must follow. In order to get benefits, you must follow treatment prescribed by your medical source(s) if this treatment is expected to restore your ability to work.

(b) When you do not follow prescribed treatment. If you do not follow the prescribed treatment without a good reason, we will not find you disabled or, if you are already receiving benefits, we will stop paying you benefits.

(c) Acceptable reasons for failure to follow prescribed treatment. We will consider your physical, mental, educational, and linguistic limitations (including any lack of facility with the English language) when determining if you have an acceptable reason for failure to follow prescribed treatment. The following are examples of a good reason for not following treatment:

(1) The specific medical treatment is contrary to the established teaching and tenets of your religion.

(2) The prescribed treatment would be cataract surgery for one eye, when there is an impairment of the other eye resulting in a severe loss of vision and is not subject to improvement through treatment.

(3) Surgery was previously performed with unsuccessful results and the same surgery is again being recommended for the same impairment.

(4) The treatment because of its magnitude (e.g., open heart surgery), unusual nature (e.g., organ transplant), or other reason is very risky for you; or

(5) The treatment involves amputation of an extremity, or a major part of an extremity.

[45 FR 55584, Aug. 20, 1980, as amended at 59 FR 1635, Jan. 12, 1994; 82 FR 5871, Jan. 18, 2017]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 369 cases (113 in the last 5 years), 1979–2026 · leading case: Marcus Hensley v. Carolyn W. Colvin, 829 F.3d 926 (8th Cir. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Marcus Hensley v. Carolyn W. Colvin, 829 F.3d 926 (8th Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “2009) (quotation omitted); see 20 C.F.R. § 404.1530 (a) (“to get benefits, you must follow treatment prescribed by your physician if this treatment can restore your ability to work”).”

Rockwood v. Astrue, 614 F. Supp. 2d 252 (N.D.N.Y. 2009). · cites it 3× “Relying on 20 C.F.R. § 404.1530 , Plaintiff also argues “the ALJ erred by drawing negative inferences against [Plaintiff] because she was not consistently receiving therapy from a psychiatrist.”

Orn v. Astrue, 495 F.3d 625 (9th Cir. 2007). “Our regulations at 20 CFR 404.1530 and 416.930 provide that, in order to get benefits, an individual must follow treatment prescribed by his or her physician if the treatment can restore the ability to work, unless the *637 individual has an acceptable reason for failing to…”

David A. Gamble v. Shirley S. Chater, Comm'r of the Soc. Sec. Admin., 68 F.3d 319 (9th Cir. 1995). · cites it 4× “The other circuits have addressed the application of 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1530 and 416.930, which permit the Commissioner to deny benefits where the claimant meets the disability criteria but fails to obtain treatment that would ameliorate his condition.”

McReynolds v. Berryhill, 341 F. Supp. 3d 869 (E.D. Ill. 2018). · cites it 3× “McReynolds relies on Social Security Ruling ("SSR") 82-59 and Social Security regulation 20 C.F.R. § 404.1530 , which provides that "[i]n order to get benefits, you must follow treatment prescribed by your medical source(s) if this treatment is expected to restore your ability…”

Annie B. PATTERSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., Defendant-Appellee, 799 F.2d 1455 (11th Cir. 1986). · cites it 4× “We also conclude that Patterson is not precluded from receiving disability benefits by 20 C.F.R. § 404.1530 (1986). I. BACKGROUND In October 1981, Patterson applied for supplemental security income and disability insurance benefits, alleging onset of disability in September 1980…”

Ja'vonce Warre, on Behalf of E.T. Iv, a Minor Child v. Comm'r of the Soc. Sec. Admin., 439 F.3d 1001 (9th Cir. 2006). “(noting that SSR 82-59 interprets 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1530 and 416.930 and is binding on the SSA).”

Goodman v. Colvin, 233 F. Supp. 3d 88 (D.D.C. 2017). · cites it 2× “Under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1530 , failure to follow a prescribed treatment plan is a basis for denying a claimant benefits when the treatment plan would restore the claimant’s ability to work.”

L.B. LOVELACE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, M.D., Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., Defendant-Appellee, 813 F.2d 55 (5th Cir. 1987). · cites it 2× “20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1530 (a), (b) and 416.930(a), (b) (1986).”

Bonnie Shramek v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 226 F.3d 809 (7th Cir. 2000). · cites it 2× “Another reason provided for the ALJ’s credibility assessment is her purported failure to comply with the prescribed medical treatment. The alleged non-compliance identified by the ALJ included her failure to quit smoking despite evidence that smoking could worsen the condition.”

Owen L. GORDON, Appellant, v. Richard S. SCHWEIKER, Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., Appellee, 725 F.2d 231 (4th Cir. 1984). · cites it 2× “20 C.F.R. § 404.1530 (b) (1983). However, a denial of social security benefits based on Gordon’s failure to have surgery would have been improper since the record shows, at the current stage at least, that he could not afford it.”

Odella PRESTON, Appellant, v. Margaret M. HECKLER, Sec'y, Dep't of Health & Human Servs., Appellee, 769 F.2d 988 (4th Cir. 1985). · cites it 3× “We hold that the district court erred in considering whether the claimant’s failure to comply with her prescribed treatment plan rendered her ineligible for benefits pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 404.1530 . Accordingly, we vacate the judgment of the district court and remand the case…”

Show all 369 citing cases →

— 20 C.F.R. § 404.1530(3) — 1 case

Sylvester Surowka v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 843 F.2d 1392 (6th Cir. 1988).

— 20 C.F.R. § 404.1530(a) — 6 cases

Pruitt v. Berryhill (S.D. Ala. 2019).

Darcy v. Saul (E.D.N.Y 2023).

Vickie L. Colavito v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 991 F.2d 794 (6th Cir. 1993).

Thelma M. Hale v. Shirley S. Chater, Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 1, 83 F.3d 431 (10th Cir. 1996).

Griswold v. SHHS (1st Cir. 1995).

— 20 C.F.R. § 404.1530(b) — 3 cases

Allen SAMPSON, Appellant, v. Kenneth S. APFEL, Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., Appellee, 165 F.3d 616 (8th Cir. 1999).

Allen Sampson v. Kenneth Apfel (8th Cir. 1999).

Chamberlain v. SSA (D.N.H. 1999).

— 20 C.F.R. § 404.1530(c) — 4 cases

Sharp v. Bowen, 705 F. Supp. 1111 (W.D. Pa. 1989).

Benedict v. Heckler, 593 F. Supp. 755 (E.D.N.Y 1984).

Tobin v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. (D.N.J. 2020).

Wright v. Barnhart, 284 F. Supp. 2d 1277 (D. Kan. 2003).

— 20 C.F.R. § 404.1530(c)(3) — 1 case

Maria Casillas Ramos v. Kilolo Kijakazi (C.D. Cal. 2022).

— 20 C.F.R. § 404.1530(d) — 1 case

Valdez v. Colvin (D. Colo. 2020).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.