Those persons who are claiming disability due to mental illnesses have the additional burden of showing that their mental impairments are not due to the use of such illegal substances as marijuana. The burden of proof is on the claimant to show the drug use is not "material." Drug use is not material if the mental impairments would continue even without the drug usage. Almost nobody involved in Social Security disability, including judges, ever gets this right. There is a Social Security Ruling that explains in exacting detail how to deal with mental illness and substance abuse. It appears that most of the time, adjudicators skip right past the ruling. Instead of analyzing the substance abuse in accordance with the ruling, they will cast the drug usage as an indicator of credibility instead. This is a creative short cut that can take the adjudicator where he or she wishes to go. But it is also a violation of the Social Security Ruling. If the Social Security does make the effort to solicit the opinion of doctor about mental illness and drug use, the results are not often much better. For example, some doctors will note in passing that "everyone know" that marijuana make psychosis worse. Oh? The actual researchshows that there is no clear connection. In some cases, marijuana can have a therapeutic, or at least palliative affect. While it is understandable why we as a society don't wish to reward what is, after all, illegal conduct, we still have to deal with substance abuse in a measured, thoughtful way. Otherwise, it's Reefer Madness redux.