vlb-all-products

vlb-c-file-manual







Raven

Alcoholism /abuse As A Secondary

9 posts in this topic

Anyone heard anything of alcoholism or alcohol abuse as a secondary to depression? If one had this diagnosis, can health problems caused by alcohol abuse also be secondary (IE liver, etc)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



Alcohol abuse Secondary to PTSD- granted:

http://www.va.gov/vetapp05/files5/0529097.txt

This is a successful widow's DIC claim- alcoholism secondary to anxiety-yet the veteran had sigificant medical evidence of SC depression too--

http://www.va.gov/vetapp96/files1/9607996.txt

This statement from a denied BVA claim states what the VA looks for in any disability that may be secondary to SC alcoholism-

"Secondary Service Connection

Disabilities secondary to alcoholism are not covered by the

“willful misconduct” bar. Regulations state that “[o]rganic

diseases and disabilities which are a secondary result of the

chronic use of alcohol as a beverage, whether out of

compulsion or otherwise, will not be considered of willful

misconduct origin.” For claims submitted prior to November

1990, disabilities secondary to alcoholism were not covered

by the “willful misconduct” bar, and compensation was

available. Effective November 1990, however, 38 U.S.C.A.

§ 1131 was amended for the express purpose of “preclud[ing]

payment of compensation for certain secondary effects arising

from willful misconduct,” including “injuries or disease

incurred during service or the result of ...the abuse of

alcohol.” As amended, 38 U.S.C.A. § 1131 now provides that

“no compensation shall be paid if the disability is a result

of the [appellant’s] own willful misconduct or abuse of

alcohol or drugs.” As a result, 38 C.F.R. § 3.301(3)(d) was

promulgated to provide that an injury or disease incurred

during active duty shall not be deemed to have been incurred

in the line of duty if such injury or disease was a result of

the abuse of alcohol or drugs by the person on whose service

benefits are claimed.

As noted, the statutory amendment applies only to claims

filed after October 31, 1990. Here, however, the appellant

initially asserted claims of entitlement to service

connection for liver disease, psychiatric disability,

gastritis and peptic ulcer disease, all as secondary to

alcoholism, in his Substantive Appeal in support of his claim

of entitlement to service connection for alcoholism, which

was received by the RO&IC in July 1993. As there is no legal

entitlement to service connection on a secondary basis for

disabilities arising from the abuse of alcohol, the claims of

service connection for liver disease, psychiatric disability,

gastritis and peptic ulcer disease are without legal merit.

Sabonis.

In addition, the Board notes that in April 1996, the Board

received a private medical report that was not accompanied by

a waiver of consideration by the RO&IC. In a written

statement dated in that same month, the appellant’s

representative noted this report but did not waive initial

RO&IC consideration. Because alcohol dependence is deemed by

statute to be the result of willful misconduct and cannot

itself be service connected, and because the veteran’s claims

for service connection for disabilities as secondary to

alcoholism were filed subsequent to November 1990, these

claims lack legal merit. " (meaning this specific claim) from:

http://www.va.gov/vetapp96/files3/9626118.txt

Basically if medical evidence finds any disability from alcoholism is Secondary to another SC disability- then there is potential to service connect the disability from alcohol as secondary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Berta,

OK now how about this:

Since the BVA is stating,

"Therefore, based on the foregoing, the Board concludes that

the veteran's sexual dysfunction disorder is proximately due

to his service-connected PTSD. Thus service connection for

that disorder is warranted."

Does this open it up for us females to get granted this same benefit due to our PTSD ?

Sexual dysfunction is not limited to reproduction ??

carlie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I confused

So if one drinks like a fish everyday because they have major depression, they can file a claim for SC alcohol abuse as a secondary, and if granted, they do not get compensation ( a 0% rating I guess).

And if they are granted SC for alcohol abuse as a secondary, and down the road they have health problems from drinking (liver problems from the abuse), they can also file a claim claiming SC liver problems from alcohol abuse, which was granted as a SC because they are depressed? Would that warrent a rating other that 0% for the liver problems?

I hope I did not confuse anyone, just trying to explain my question

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Berta,

OK now how about this:

Since the BVA is stating,

"Therefore, based on the foregoing, the Board concludes that

the veteran's sexual dysfunction disorder is proximately due

to his service-connected PTSD. Thus service connection for

that disorder is warranted."

Does this open it up for us females to get granted this same benefit due to our PTSD ?

Sexual dysfunction is not limited to reproduction ??

carlie

Berta: I'm not trying to say that women whould not be so qualified , I am just trying to put some input to why their may be difficulty in it for a women.

The BVA is not ruling on a physical problem with guys plumbing, its that his electrical circuite can not tell the valve to turn on for the delivery mechanism to become a functional device.

Another analogy, A fire truck arrive to a fire, the fire chief tells the fire truck pumper attendant to turn on the pumper, but de doesn't, because he doesn't, no water can get to the hose to charge the system for use.

If it is shown that the hose can be charged but their is still a delivery problem, I doubt the BVA would have ruled as it did.

I gues in a womens case, she would have to show that due to PTSD the delivery recepticle is broken and none usable in the present condition. If it was otherwise found serviceable, then they to might find it diffecult to be awarded.

Again, my analogy is not to be argumentative but for open discussion on the problems defending a claim of this nature.

Jim S. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim,

This is only my opinion.

If sex ( because of PTSD ) can't begin in my brain -- taint never gonna happen

with my body.

If it doesn't work -- it doesn't work -- whether male or female.

Any women out there have an opinion on this ?

carlie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.