Calculates unrealistic benefit totals for families with disabled adult children.

[brian-courts]

As shown in the attached spreadsheet, the online version of this calculator (which appears to be the same as the GitHub version) calculates unrealistic benefit totals for families with disabled adult children. There are two reasons for this:

1. For married couples, the benefits that would be received by children if both parents are deceased are not added into the total. This results in totals that are 22% to 30% lower than they would be if the child-only benefits were included, in the disabled adult child cases I tested.
2. For both single parents and couples, the calculator does not take into account the mortality of children. It assumes that children live until their parents reach the age of 115. That assumption results in totals that are 3% to 31% higher than they would be if it did take take into account the mortality of children, in the disabled adult child cases I tested.

The differences are much larger for disabled children than they would be for non-disabled children because non-disabled children only receive benefits until age 18, generally.

I suggest that the option to include disabled children be deleted and an explanatory note added, until the calculator can be revised to take into account children's mortality.

DisabledChildBenefits.xlsx

[batsatt]

Just wanted to comment here so that I will receive updates on this issue. I am likely affected by your second case above: my disabled child's life expectancy is relatively short.

[MikePiper]

@batsatt Unfortunately, this is an issue I am aware of but no longer working on. I cannot see a way forward that does not cause the complexity of the code to absolutely explode. I've spent a fair bit of time attempting it, but I'm completely stumped.

Right now, in a married couple scenario, the benefits are calculated each year for four cases: both alive, only personA alive, only personB alive, neither alive. (This occurs in benefit.service, familymaximum.service, and earningstest.service.) To add one child's mortality outcomes into the mix doubles that to 8 different cases that have to be calculated. And we'd have to be able to account for mortality outcomes of multiple children (as many as 6, at least in theory). So instead of 4 cases, it's 4 x 2^6.

[batsatt]

I hear you. Well, at the very least you should consider adding a warning about this. And maybe some guidance about how to interpret the report while factoring in the life expectancy of a disabled child...

Seems to me there are two scenarios:

1. Child's life expectancy exceeds both parents. In this case, only the present value is too high, right? The last line of the Year-by-Year child benefit is still valid, and would just apply out to the child's death. I assume this scenario has no impact on the parent SS income.
2. Child's life expectancy does not exceed both parents. In this case, the present value is again too high, but the Year-by-Year benefit amounts can be manually adjusted by the user to subtract the child benefit starting in the assumed death year.

Perhaps you could add to the content below where the present value result is shown. For example, a sentence that says what the calculation assumed as the age/year of death for each spouse, followed by the (dynamic) warning/guidance if child benefits are included.

Knowing the assumed age/year of death for each parent would enable a user to adjust for the second case above without too much work. I'd probably map your table into a spreadsheet and make the adjustments there.

[MikePiper]

@batsatt I added a warning regarding the mortality assumption for the child(ren).

As far as mortality assumptions for the parents, it's an input that's adjustable by the user. But by default the calculator is not assuming a particular age/year of death. This article discusses the reasoning for such: https://obliviousinvestor.com/long-will-collect-social-security-survivor-benefits/