chevron-down Created with Sketch Beta.

ARTICLE

Tagged and Targeted: How Social Media Posts Are Fueling Disability Benefit Denials

Andrew November

Summary

  • Social media posts are increasingly used by private insurers to deny Long-Term Disability (LTD) claims, often misinterpreting curated content as evidence of non-disability. 
  • LTD policies under ERISA and state laws are vulnerable to improper reviews based on out-of-context social media surveillance.
  • Insurers cast wide nets, monitoring multiple platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, and Venmo, often ignoring nuances like older or unrelated posts.
  • Courts recognize that limited activities shown on social media don’t equate to the capacity for full-time work, highlighting issues with such surveillance tactics.
Tagged and Targeted: How Social Media Posts Are Fueling Disability Benefit Denials
sturti via Getty Images

In recent years, private insurance companies have increasingly turned to social media to investigate Long-Term Disability (LTD) claims, scouring posts and photos for any evidence they can use to deny benefits. Despite the serious implications of this practice, it has received little media attention, leaving many disabled individuals unaware of the potential risks to their claims. Posts showing activities as simple as attending a family event or going on vacation can be misinterpreted as proof that a claimant is not as disabled as they report, leading to unjust denials. Think about it—how many times have you posted something on social media that doesn’t truly reflect the reality of your day-to-day life?

This quiet—yet pervasive—surveillance of LTD claimants raises concerns about privacy and fairness in the claims process. Every day, social media becomes an increasingly integral part of our lives. As a generation that grew up with social media in full swing now graduates high school, the need to bring attention to its potential risks, especially in areas like disability claims, has never been more critical.

By contrast, the use of social media to monitor Social Security disability benefits gained national attention when The New York Times released an article on March 10, 2019, titled "On Disability and on Facebook? Uncle Sam Wants to Watch What You Post." The story garnered widespread attention, drawing comments from lawmakers like Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown, who, along with Pennsylvania Senator Bob Casey, raised concerns about using Facebook and Twitter to identify fraud among Social Security beneficiaries. In a joint letter to the Trump administration, Senator Casey criticized the proposal, stating, "Using social media posts as a basis for cutting off Social Security benefits for Americans who are entitled to them is unacceptable." Casey went on to emphasize that "this proposal shows that the Trump administration is more interested in cutting Social Security benefits than it is in making sure that seniors, survivors, and Americans with disabilities get the benefits they've earned." Despite this public outcry over Social Security, the similarly troubling surveillance of LTD claims by private insurers has largely flown under the radar, even though it impacts thousands of disabled individuals.

This article will explore how private insurance companies increasingly use social media to deny legitimate claims, often based on misinterpretations of online activity. From basic policy information to real-life examples of how innocent social media posts can be used against claimants, this article highlights the growing risks for individuals relying on LTD benefits. This is not just intrusive—it is dangerous.

The Basics of Long-Term Disability Insurance

Approximately one-third of U.S. employers offer long-term disability insurance, often as part of an employee benefits package. Over fifty insurance companies sell LTD policies with different terms and conditions. If an individual obtains LTD insurance through their employer, it is typically governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). On the other hand, state contract laws apply if disability insurance is purchased outside of an employment relationship.

Whether a disability claim is filed with the Social Security Administration or a private insurance company, claimants now face the reality that their social media activity will likely be scrutinized to assess their eligibility for benefits. This begs a fundamental question: What does disability really look like?

Fundamentally, “Disability does not mean that a claimant must vegetate in a dark room excluded from all forms of human and social activity.” However, it is also important to note how little social media tells us.

The Social Media Facade

If we are honest, social media rarely reflects reality. Most users post a curated version of their lives, showing only the highlights. Whether using filters or hashtags like #blessed, #grateful, or #winning, social media often portrays an idealized version of daily life. Research supports this. In a 2017 study conducted by the University of Pittsburgh, 1,787 adults between the ages of 19 and 32 were asked about their social media use and its impact on mental health. According to Dr. Brian Primack, a co-author of the study and Director of the Center for Research on Media, Technology, and Health, “People who feel socially isolated may be reaching out on social media on some level to self-medicate. These are curated images, but because they're from real people, they seem to reflect real life.”

The problem arises when disability insurance companies interpret these idealized, curated images as evidence that an individual is not disabled. The discrepancy between social media posts and the everyday experience of living with a disability is vast, which the Courts have recognized. Social media does not capture the pain, exhaustion, or struggles that occur off-camera. Courts in the Sixth Circuit have recognized the problem with using such limited snapshots of a person to deny their Long-Term Disability claim.

The Dangers of Social Media Misinterpretation

The use of social media in LTD determinations is fraught with the potential for factual and legal errors. For example, if an insurance company views posts suggesting that someone is engaging in work-related activities, they might wrongly conclude that the individual is not disabled. However, most LTD policies have a specific earnings loss requirement, meaning that a person could still work and meet the policy’s definition of disability or partial disability if their earnings are below a certain threshold or they experience a significant loss of income due to their impairments. Insurers often overlook nuance when they rely on surface-level social media content to assess claimants' eligibility.

There are also cases where insurers infer limitations—or the lack thereof—based on superficial details in a photo. I recall a case where an LTD claimant with significant hand limitations was denied benefits after the insurance company discovered various social media posts and photos. The insurer pointed to images that included the claimant traveling, attending social events, and participating in activities like visiting California and attending football games with friends, suggesting these activities were inconsistent with his disability claim. However, the insurer failed to consider the broader context of these posts. Many of these activities were part of his ongoing recovery journey, and adaptive tools, such as a mechanical hand, often assisted his participation. Furthermore, the claimant’s use of his legs or attendance at social events had no bearing on his hand limitations, which were central to his disability. The insurer’s narrow focus on these out-of-context images completely disregarded the true nature of his impairment. Also, it represented the type of improper claims review that Courts have criticized. Courts around the country recognize that an ability to perform limited activities for a limited time does not automatically equate with full-time work capacity.

When insurance companies rely on social media to determine eligibility for benefits, they often fail to consider the recency of the content they’re reviewing. Who hasn’t shared a vacation picture long after the trip was over? Insurance companies often overlook this possibility, using older photos to claim that a beneficiary is engaging in activities beyond their reported limitations. In some cases, the photo may have been taken years before the claimant’s disability onset date, but insurers conveniently use it to undermine their claim. This routine tactic in LTD cases is a prime example of the disconnection between reality and what’s portrayed online.

The Future: Increased Surveillance

To make matters worse, insurers don’t stop at just one or two platforms; they cast a wide net, monitoring everything from Facebook and Instagram to Pinterest, LinkedIn, and Google. Every post, photo, or comment is scrutinized for any hint of activity that might be used to challenge a claimant's reported limitations. Insurers are even known to scrutinize public Venmo transactions, using them to track social interactions or expenditures that could suggest activities inconsistent with a disability claim. It might seem far-fetched, but a payment captioned “dinner with friends” can quickly become “evidence” in the hands of an insurance company.

But it doesn’t end there. Insurers often leverage easily accessible Google searches to track down relatives, co-workers, or close friends. They’ll scour these connections' posts and social media accounts, hoping to find any mentions, tags, or photos of the claimant that could be twisted to fit their narrative. Even if the post is a harmless tag in a family gathering photo or a friend’s vacation album, insurers may use these out-of-context snapshots to deny or terminate legitimate claims.

Increased surveillance has become a common tactic in LTD cases, with insurers relying more heavily on this intrusive method to justify denials. This kind of investigation can create a distorted view of the claimant’s life, ignoring the realities of their condition while exploiting the curated nature of social media. In a world where even casual online activity can be weaponized, claimants must understand the far-reaching scope of surveillance and take measures to protect their online presence.

Every attorney should advise their clients to ensure their social media settings are private to protect themselves from unnecessary scrutiny. Remember that social media companies frequently change the steps needed to secure accounts, so please stay on top of those changes as we do to help safeguard client privacy.

    Author