“Visible Enough to Qualify?" Diagnostic Objectivity and Access to Disability Assistance

Disability assistance programs in the United States, such as Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and welfare benefits, are vital safety nets for individuals unable to work due to disabling conditions. However, eligibility for these programs often hinges on objective medical evidence, which can disadvantage individuals with conditions that rely on subjective assessment, like chronic pain, psychiatric disorders, or cognitive impairments. This study, using data from the 2023 American Community Survey, examined how disability type—categorized as “objective,” “subjective,” or “both”—shapes access to SSI and welfare benefits among adults aged 18–64 reporting functional difficulties. Findings present that individuals with cognitive and independent living impairments face the highest odds of receiving benefits, while those with both subjective and objective disabilities have the lowest predicted probability of receipt. Regression analyses and predictive modeling suggest that disability programs systematically favor certain functional profiles, particularly those that are more easily recognized or validated through existing administrative frameworks. These patterns persist even after I adjust for sociodemographic and employment-related factors. The findings highlight critical limitations in current disability eligibility criteria, revealing how reliance on diagnostic objectivity can obscure real functional needs.