Social Security spousal benefits with DAC denied due to family maximum limit - finally got answers
After months of confusion, I finally got clarity on my Social Security situation through my Representative's office. I'm sharing in case anyone else is dealing with this unusual scenario. I applied for spousal benefits last year (my husband receives $2,850/month), expecting to get half of his benefit. Instead, I was told I'd only receive my own retirement benefit of $1,375. What confused me was that we have an adult disabled child (DAC) receiving benefits on my husband's record. Here's what I learned after the Congressional inquiry: When there's a DAC involved, they calculate differently using the Family Maximum Benefit (FMB). The FMB on my husband's record is $4,100. They subtract my personal benefit ($1,375) from this amount, leaving $2,725. Then they split this amount in HALF between me and our disabled adult child ($1,362.50 each). Since this split amount ($1,362.50) is LESS than my own benefit ($1,375), Social Security will only pay me my own benefit. Our DAC still gets their 50% share. I don't agree with this policy at all - it essentially penalizes families with disabled adult children - but at least I now understand how they calculated it. Just wanted to share this weird quirk of Social Security rules in case anyone else runs into this situation with spousal benefits and a DAC.
26 comments


Sofia Morales
Thank you for sharing this! The Family Maximum Benefit rules are some of the most confusing in all of Social Security, and they hit families with disabled children particularly hard. You explained it perfectly. The FMB formula creates what's called the "maximum family benefit" which limits the total amount payable on one earner's record. What many people don't realize is that when calculating spousal benefits in DAC situations, they use this weird "splitting" method you described. Unfortunately, this is correct per their Program Operations Manual System (POMS). It's not intuitive at all, but your congressional inquiry got you the right information.
0 coins
Dylan Cooper
•Thanks for confirming. Does this same formula apply for survivor benefits too? Heaven forbid something happens to my husband, I'm wondering if the same rules would apply or if it's calculated differently?
0 coins
StarSailor
wow thats so unfair!! my sister has a disabled kid too and she was counting on getting spousal benefits when she turns 62 next yr. gonna tell her to check this out. such garbage how they treat families w/ disabled kids!!
0 coins
Sofia Morales
•It really depends on the specific situation. Your sister should calculate her own retirement benefit first. The Family Maximum only comes into play when multiple people draw from one record. If her own benefit is significantly lower than half her husband's, she might still get some spousal benefits even with the DAC involved.
0 coins
Dmitry Ivanov
I'm in almost the exact same situation except I haven't gotten any answers from SSA after trying for MONTHS. I've called 23 times (not exaggerating) and either get disconnected or told different things every time. One rep told me I should be getting spousal benefits ON TOP OF my own benefit which I knew was wrong. Another told me the family max doesn't apply to spouses (also wrong). Did your Congressional rep's office submit some special form? How long did it take to get this resolved once you contacted them? I'm at my wit's end with this!
0 coins
Dylan Cooper
•They submitted what's called a "Congressional Inquiry." It took about 5 weeks to get a response, but the answer was detailed and in writing which is what I needed. The Congressional caseworker told me they have special channels to SSA that bypass the normal customer service routes. Definitely worth trying if you're stuck in the regular customer service loop.
0 coins
Ava Garcia
•Have you tried using Claimyr? I was in a similar situation trying to get through to SSA for weeks about my disability review. I found this service at claimyr.com that got me connected to an actual SSA agent in under 10 minutes. They have a video showing how it works: https://youtu.be/Z-BRbJw3puU - saved me so much frustration and I actually got my questions answered by a knowledgeable person instead of getting disconnected repeatedly. Worth checking out if you're still trying to get answers directly from SSA.
0 coins
Miguel Silva
This is actually a complex but correct application of the Family Maximum Benefit (FMB) rules. When there's an entitled spouse and an entitled child (including a Disabled Adult Child) on the same record, they follow a specific calculation path: 1. Calculate the Family Maximum Benefit 2. Subtract the primary worker's benefit 3. The remainder is what's available for auxiliaries (spouse, children) 4. This remainder gets divided equally among the auxiliaries 5. If your own benefit exceeds your portion of the remainder, you only get your own benefit It's detailed in POMS RS 00615.020 and the calculation is working as designed, even though it feels unfair. The policy rationale is to avoid paying out "too much" on a single earnings record, but it definitely impacts families with disabled children more severely.
0 coins
Zainab Ismail
•So does that mean if the disabled kid wasnt in the picture, she would get the full spousal benefit? That seems super unfair. My sisters kid has downs syndrome and now im wondering if shes gonna hit the same issue when she applies.
0 coins
Connor O'Neill
Im confused about something... when you say "DAC" do you mean "CDB" (childhood disability benefits)? Ive been told CDB is the current term for adult disabled children. Is DAC the same thing? Or is this yet another example of SS changing terms and confusing everyone!!??
0 coins
Sofia Morales
•You're both right actually! Social Security uses multiple terms for the same benefit: - DAC = Disabled Adult Child - CDB = Childhood Disability Benefits They're technically the same program, just different names. Social Security's systems and internal documents often use DAC, while their public-facing materials sometimes use CDB. Just another example of SSA's wonderful consistency! 😅
0 coins
Zainab Ismail
I hate to be that person but are you SURE you got the right info? When I went through this 2 years ago, the person at SSA told me it was a 3-way split of the family maximum minus the primary beneficiary (my husband). Did your letter specifically say they subtracted YOUR benefit from the family maximum? That doesn't sound right to me.
0 coins
Dylan Cooper
•Yes, it was very specific. They subtracted my benefit from the FMB, not my husband's. I have the actual letter from SSA that was sent to my Representative's office. The exact wording was: "The Family Maximum Benefit of $4,100 minus Mrs. [name]'s own retirement benefit of $1,375 equals $2,725. This amount is then divided equally between Mrs. [name] and the entitled DAC ($1,362.50 each)." So they're definitely subtracting my benefit from the FMB, not my husband's.
0 coins
StarSailor
seems like ssa rules are designed to be confusing on purpose!! my mom tried for YEARS to get a straight answer about her widow benefits with my disabled brother still receivinh benefits. eventually she just gave up and took whatever they gave her 😡
0 coins
Jacob Lewis
This is incredibly helpful information - thank you for taking the time to share your experience and the specific calculations! I'm dealing with a similar situation where my disabled adult son receives benefits on my husband's record, and I've been getting conflicting information about my spousal benefits eligibility. Your breakdown of how they subtract YOUR benefit from the Family Maximum (rather than your husband's) and then split the remainder is eye-opening. I had no idea they calculated it this way. It does seem really unfair that families with disabled children essentially get penalized in the spousal benefit calculation. I think I'm going to follow your lead and contact my Representative's office for a Congressional inquiry. The regular SSA customer service has been completely unhelpful, and I need this in writing like you got. Did you have to provide any specific documentation when you initially contacted your Rep's office, or did they handle gathering all the details from SSA directly?
0 coins
Oliver Becker
•I'm so glad this helped clarify things for you! The Congressional inquiry process was surprisingly straightforward. I just contacted my Representative's office through their website and explained that I was getting conflicting information from SSA about my spousal benefits calculation with a DAC involved. I provided basic info like my SSN, my husband's SSN, and a brief description of the issue. The caseworker handled everything from there - they didn't need me to gather additional documentation since they have direct access to SSA records through their Congressional channels. They just needed enough info to identify my case and understand what questions to ask SSA. The whole thing took about 5 weeks, but the response was incredibly detailed and in writing, which was exactly what I needed. Much better than the phone runaround! Hope this helps you get the answers you need too.
0 coins
Layla Mendes
This is such valuable information - thank you for sharing your experience and getting to the bottom of this confusing situation! As someone who works with families navigating Social Security benefits, I see this exact scenario come up more often than people realize, and you've explained it better than most SSA representatives could. The Family Maximum Benefit calculation you described is absolutely correct, and it's one of those "hidden" rules that can really blindside families. What makes it particularly frustrating is that most people (understandably) assume spousal benefits work the same way whether or not there's a DAC involved - but as you discovered, the math changes completely. Your point about this essentially penalizing families with disabled children is spot-on. It's one of those policy quirks that seems to work against the very families who often need the most support. The fact that you had to go through a Congressional inquiry to get a clear, written explanation is unfortunately typical - the regular customer service reps often don't understand these complex interactions between different benefit types. Thanks again for taking the time to document this so thoroughly. I'm sure your post will help other families who find themselves in similar situations understand what's happening with their benefits.
0 coins
Keisha Jackson
•Thank you for highlighting how important it is to document these complex situations! As a newcomer to this community, I'm amazed at how convoluted these Social Security rules can be. Reading through Dylan's original post and all these responses, it's clear that families dealing with disabled children face so many additional hurdles that most people never even know exist. It's really concerning that you need a Congressional inquiry just to get accurate information about your own benefits. The fact that regular SSA customer service reps don't understand these calculations shows there's a serious training or system problem. How are families supposed to make informed decisions about their financial future when even the people working at SSA can't explain the rules correctly? I'm grateful to everyone here for sharing their knowledge and experiences - this kind of peer support seems more reliable than the official channels, which is both helpful and troubling at the same time.
0 coins
Sofia Torres
Thank you so much for sharing this detailed breakdown! I'm new to this community and currently helping my elderly mother navigate a very similar situation. She's been trying to understand why her spousal benefits were calculated differently than expected, and we also have a disabled adult child in the family receiving DAC benefits. Your explanation of how they subtract YOUR benefit from the Family Maximum (rather than the primary worker's benefit) and then split the remainder is incredibly helpful - we had no idea this was how the calculation worked. The SSA representatives we've spoken with have given us completely different explanations each time we've called, so getting this clear, documented example is invaluable. I'm definitely going to follow your advice about contacting our Representative's office for a Congressional inquiry. It sounds like that's the only way to get accurate, written information about these complex benefit interactions. Did you find that having the written explanation helped when dealing with SSA afterward, or was this mainly just for your own understanding of the calculation? This really does seem unfair to families with disabled children - it's like being penalized for having additional family members who need support. Thank you again for taking the time to share your experience and help others navigate this confusing system.
0 coins
Ella Lewis
•Welcome to the community, Sofia! I'm also relatively new here but have found this to be such a valuable resource for understanding these complex Social Security situations that seem to stump even the official representatives. Your question about whether the written explanation helped with future SSA dealings is really important. From what I've learned reading through these discussions, having that documented Congressional inquiry response seems crucial not just for understanding, but also for any future appeals or questions that might come up. It creates an official paper trail that's much harder for SSA to dispute or contradict later. The consistency issue with SSA reps giving different explanations is so frustrating and unfortunately seems to be the norm rather than the exception. It really highlights why communities like this one are so important - we end up having to rely on each other's experiences to figure out what the actual rules are! I hope your Congressional inquiry goes smoothly and you get the clear answers your mother needs. Please keep us updated on how it goes - these shared experiences help everyone learn and navigate the system better.
0 coins
Fatima Al-Maktoum
As someone new to this community, I want to thank you for sharing such a detailed and clear explanation of this complex situation. The Family Maximum Benefit rules are incredibly confusing, and your breakdown of how they subtract YOUR retirement benefit from the FMB (rather than your husband's) before splitting the remainder is really eye-opening. What strikes me most is how this calculation essentially creates a hidden penalty for families with disabled adult children. It's troubling that you had to go through a Congressional inquiry just to get accurate information that should have been readily available through normal SSA channels. The fact that regular customer service representatives seem unable to explain these calculations correctly is a serious problem. Your decision to share this experience is so valuable for other families who might be facing similar situations. The specific numbers and calculation method you provided will help others understand what to expect and know when to escalate through Congressional channels if they're getting inconsistent information from SSA. It's unfortunate that families dealing with disabled children face these additional financial complexities on top of everything else they're managing. Thank you for taking the time to document this thoroughly - it's exactly the kind of real-world insight that makes this community so helpful.
0 coins
Carmella Fromis
•Thank you for this thoughtful response, Fatima! As another newcomer to this community, I'm struck by how Dylan's post has become such an educational resource for all of us trying to understand these complex Social Security rules. What really concerns me is the systemic issue you've highlighted - that families already dealing with the challenges of caring for disabled children are essentially being penalized in ways that aren't transparent or well-explained. The fact that it took a Congressional inquiry to get accurate information suggests there's a real gap between Social Security's internal knowledge and what they communicate to the public. I'm grateful that Dylan chose to share this detailed breakdown rather than just keeping the information private. This kind of peer-to-peer knowledge sharing seems to be filling a crucial gap that the official system isn't addressing. It makes me wonder how many other families are out there getting incorrect information or just accepting confusing benefit calculations without knowing they could get better answers through Congressional channels. This community is proving to be an invaluable resource for navigating these bureaucratic complexities. Thank you for adding your perspective - it helps newcomers like us understand both the specific rules and the broader systemic issues at play.
0 coins
QuantumQuasar
Thank you so much for sharing this incredibly detailed explanation! As someone new to this community, I'm both grateful for the clarity you've provided and deeply frustrated by how unnecessarily complex Social Security has made these calculations. Your experience really highlights a major problem - families with disabled adult children are essentially being punished by a system that should be supporting them. The fact that you had to go through a Congressional inquiry just to get a straight answer is unacceptable. I've been reading through all these responses and it's clear that SSA's regular customer service is completely inadequate for handling these complex situations. What really bothers me is how this Family Maximum Benefit rule creates what amounts to a "disability penalty" for families. Instead of recognizing that families caring for disabled children often need more support, the system actually reduces their benefits. It's backwards and cruel. I'm planning to bookmark your post and share it with others who might be facing similar situations. The specific calculation breakdown you provided - showing how they subtract YOUR benefit from the FMB before splitting - is information that should be readily available but clearly isn't. Thank you for doing the legwork to get these answers and then taking the time to educate the rest of us. This community seems to provide better guidance than the actual government agency!
0 coins
Chloe Taylor
•Welcome to the community, QuantumQuasar! Your frustration is completely understandable and shared by so many of us here. What Dylan has uncovered really does expose a fundamental flaw in how these benefits are structured. I'm also new here, but reading through everyone's experiences, it's become clear that families with disabled children face a double burden - not only do they have the daily challenges of caregiving, but they also get caught in these bureaucratic traps that actually reduce their financial support. The "disability penalty" you mentioned is such an apt way to describe it. What's especially troubling is that this isn't just about confusing rules - it's about a system that seems designed to limit benefits in ways that aren't transparent to the families affected. If Dylan hadn't been persistent enough to go through a Congressional inquiry, they might never have understood why their benefits were calculated this way. This community is definitely proving more helpful than the official channels. It's concerning that we have to rely on each other to decode our own government's benefit calculations, but I'm grateful for members like Dylan who are willing to share their hard-won knowledge. Thank you for highlighting the broader systemic issues at play here - it helps newcomers like us understand that these problems go way beyond individual cases.
0 coins
Ethan Taylor
As a newcomer to this community, I'm absolutely floored by the complexity of what you've uncovered here. Thank you for sharing such a detailed breakdown of your Congressional inquiry results - this is exactly the kind of real-world information that families need but can never seem to get from SSA directly. The calculation you've outlined is genuinely shocking to me. The idea that they subtract YOUR retirement benefit from the Family Maximum before splitting the remainder between you and your DAC essentially creates a built-in penalty for families with disabled children. It's like the system is designed to reduce support for the very families who often need it most. What really troubles me is how you had to fight for months and ultimately involve your Representative just to get a clear explanation of your own benefits. The fact that SSA's regular customer service couldn't provide this information (or worse, provided incorrect information) suggests there's a serious training or communication problem within the agency. I'm bookmarking this post to share with others who might be in similar situations. Your persistence in getting to the bottom of this and then taking the time to educate the rest of us is incredibly valuable. It's unfortunate that this community has to serve as a better resource than the official government agency, but I'm grateful for members like you who are willing to share their hard-won knowledge. This really opens my eyes to how many "hidden" rules there might be in Social Security that families are completely unaware of until they're directly impacted.
0 coins
Ava Martinez
•Welcome to the community, Ethan! Your perspective as a newcomer really captures what I think many of us are feeling after reading Dylan's detailed explanation. The term "hidden rules" is so accurate - it's like there's this whole shadow system of calculations and policies that families don't know exist until they accidentally stumble into them. What's particularly concerning is how these rules seem to disproportionately impact families who are already dealing with significant challenges. The fact that caring for a disabled adult child can actually reduce your Social Security benefits feels fundamentally wrong from a policy perspective. It's the opposite of what you'd expect from a social safety net. Dylan's experience also highlights how unreliable the official information channels are. If trained SSA representatives can't consistently explain these calculations correctly, how are families supposed to plan for their financial future? The Congressional inquiry route shouldn't be necessary just to understand your own benefits, but it seems to be the only way to get accurate information. I'm grateful for this community where people like Dylan share their experiences so thoroughly. It's becoming clear that peer support and shared knowledge are often more reliable than the official sources, which is both helpful and deeply troubling. Thank you for highlighting these broader systemic issues - it helps put individual experiences into context.
0 coins