"a blanket statement that lupus was not disabling and should not qualify one for disability"


Misassumptions regarding lupus (and most diseases or conditions) can happen on both at either end of the spectrum. Saying that "lupus is not disabling and should not qualify one for disability" (*not Judge Judy's exact words) is not correct. Saying, ""lupus instantly causes total disability and should result in automatic disability approval" is also not correct.

The symptoms of lupus (SLE) will cause some level of disability. Many unfortunate lupus sufferers will experience total disability at some point in the course of their disease; that may come sooner or later in the course of the condition for different people.

I'm appalled by what Judge Judy said. I think it was insensitive at best (I have my fingers crossed that maybe she will make a public apology and clarification) and incredibly bigoted and/or ignorant at worst. 'm also a little confused by it. In describing her dil, she says somedays she's exhausted, somedays she gets done what she needs to. Judge Judy never actually says that what she needs to do ( I'm paraphrasing, but here's the link if anyone needs it : http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...55123115,d.eW0 ) includes SGA. Heck, I get done what I NEED to. Unfortunately, bathing, housework, working at a job, driving the kids to school because they missed the bus......none of them are NEEDS, they are WANTS.

Then she says that sometimes it's debilitating and sometimes not. Is that supposed to mean that for some people it disabling and for some people it's not ? Or does it mean that just because her dil isn't that bad some of the time, she expects ALL people with lupus can do SGA ? Does she "get" that employers usually aren't too fond of employees who only show up 1/2 the time ?

Will she still be saying, "Meh" if her dil ends up on dialysis ?