SSR 60-17. OLDEST RECORD DISAGREES WITH CONVINCING, MORE RECENT EVIDENCE OF AGE

In 1955, after the death of A, W applied for mother's insurance benefits

on his earnings record. At that time she gave her date of birth as

December 24, 1899, but her age was not material to her eligibility for

benefits as long as she had in her care a child under 18 entitled to

benefits. (Section 202(g) of the Social Security Act.) In December 1957,

after her son had reached age 18 and they no longer were entitled to

benefits, W applied for widow's insurance benefits under section 202(e)

alleging that she had already reached the retirement age of 62 and that

her correct date of birth was December 24, 1895.

As evidence of her date of birth the following documents were

submitted:

Regulations No. 4, § 404.703 provides that in determining the weight to

be given to evidence offered to prove age, consideration will be given to

its general probative value. The probative value of evidence of age is

determined by considering such factors as the purpose for which a record

was established, the basis for the record, the formality of the record,

and its location and age. Other factors being equal, the oldest record

normally has the highest probative value.

In this case, however, in the face of the school records made three years

later and other explanatory statements, doubt is cast upon the correctness

of the 1911 record of the family's arrival in the United States which

normally would have great weight and validity in establishing age. The

reason for giving incorrect ages for the children at that time was

convincingly explained. The school records made in 1914 establish the

dates of birth of the three younger children as alleged in their

affidavits. R could not have been as young as three years of age and she

had to be nearly six at the time she entered the United States since her

father had come to the United States about five years earlier.

Correspondingly, F could not have been four years of age but had to be

nearly nine as is indicated on her school record

es of birth of the three younger children as alleged in their

affidavits. R could not have been as young as three years of age and she

had to be nearly six at the time she entered the United States since her

father had come to the United States about five years earlier.

Correspondingly, F could not have been four years of age but had to be

nearly nine as is indicated on her school record. W was the second of the

six children and must have been born several years before S, the fourth

child, whose date of birth was definitely established as September 25,

1899. Although the school records do not establish W's actual date of

birth, the doctor's record established in 1935 shows her date of birth as

December 24, 1895. This record, which supports W's allegation, was based

on information given upon the doctor's insistence and constitutes credible

evidence.

It is held , therefore, that the evidence and statements presented

are sufficient to establish that W was born on December 24, 1895, as

claimed.