Disparity between claimant's symptoms and medication prescribed did not compel conclusion that doctor was inaccurate in describing severity of claimant's mental impairments, even though that inference could be drawn. Doctor was a general practitioner, not a psychiatrist. Court comments that ALJ's conclusion about schizophrenic claimant's mental RFC is incredible and that the evidence was not weighed in and sifted in a balanced and even-handed manner. ALJ had already heard case initially and on remand from district court. Testimony of a non-examining medical advisor--to be distinguished from the non-testimonial written reports in the instant case--can alone constitute substantial evidence, depending on the circumstances.

Failure of putative father to claim paternity directly in the two weeks available to him prior to his death from lung cancer is not proof of nonpaternity of illegitimate minor child seeking child's insurance benefits. Secretary has considerable latitude to determine the type and extent of evidence needed to establish paternity so long as such standards are reasonable. Discretion does not include the right to act arbitrarily or without criteria. Court doubts the ability of any ALJ in these circumstances to proceed with the case unaffected by his earlier judgment and suggests it might be appropriate to have a different ALJ "take a completely fresh look" at case. ALJ's conclusion that claimant failed to meet her burden of proof of child's paternity was unreasonable and not supported by substantial evidence.