Center for
Retirement Research
at Boston College
Hovey House
140 Commonwealth
Chestnut Hill
MA 02467-3808

617-552-1762 TEL
617-552-0191 FAX
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Web accessibility

 

The Evolution of Social Security Disabled Widow(er)s' Benefits

Print
by Eric R. Kingson, Margaret Morse, and Gary Calhoun May 2003

WP#2003-9  

Abstract

Initially enacted in 1967, the Social Security disabled widow(er)s benefit provides permanently reduced cash benefits equal to 71 1/2 percent of the deceased spouse's primary insurance amount (PIA) to approximately 195,000 disabled widows and 5,000 widowers ages 50 through 64. Among the most economically at risk beneficiaries, an estimated 37 percent have below-poverty incomes. This paper begins with a discussion of the benefit's incremental evolution, including the rationale behind the original legislation, subsequent amendments and policy proposals. It then profiles current and potential disabled widow(er) beneficiaries, and assesses proposals to liberalize the benefit -- including proposals to eliminate the age 50 eligibility criteria, reform the onset of disability requirement, increase the benefit amount to 100 percent of the PIA, and eliminate the 24 month waiting period for Medicare benefits. The analysis draws upon government and other policy documents, interviews with policy actors and six years of pooled Current Population Survey data.

For executive summary in PDF

For full paper in PDF

Eric R. Kingson is Professor of Social Work and Public Administration, School of Social Work, College of Human Services and Health Professions at Syracuse University. Margaret Morse, M.SW., a recent graduate of the Syracuse University School of Social Work, was the research assistant for the project. Gary Calhoun is an Assistant Professor at Bridgewater State College. The authors wish to acknowledge with appreciation the insights provided by Robert M. Ball, Lou Glasse, Robert J. Myers, and congressional aids to the U.S. House Ways and Means Committee and the U.S. Senate Finance Committee. The research reported herein is an extension of work supported by the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College performed pursuant to a grant from the U.S. Social Security Administration (SSA) funded as part of the Retirement Research Consortium. The opinions and conclusions are solely those of the authors and should not be construed as representing the opinions or policies of the Social Security Administration or any agency of the Federal Government, or of the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.