vlb-all-products

vlb-c-file-manual







Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
annahonda

Nexus Statement For Ptsd - Triggers

13 posts in this topic

Hi everyone,

First of all I want to thank you for all the information I get from this site. My question is about the needed nexus statement for a PTSD claim. I recently had a C and P exam and the closest thing to a Nexus was the last paragraph.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

"After reading the C-Folder , the electronic medical records and the medical literature it is reasonable to conclude that the veterans allegations of manifesting PTSD as a result of sexual abuse(victim) are considered credible and the PTSD in question is fully linked to the service. The conclusions of these reports are based purely on the veterans allegations. This examiner does not have independent verifiable information as the veteran never reported the incident."

I have read through the forum that a nexus must read 'as likely as not" or "more than likely". Does this mean that I will still need to get a Nexus statement from another source?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



Warning Possible ......TRIGGERS....

One other thing that I noticed when I reread the entire C and P Exam was this paragraph:

"The veteran stated doing well until about 1985 when she was stationed in Germany, specifically at Stuttgart and another serviceman that she does not know the name of she can only describe him as a AA/NA male who, more than likely than not, was at the rank of E-5 -raped her "

My question is the more than likely than not the fact that his rank was E-5, or the fact of the rape..? Which is more likely than not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Warning Possible ......TRIGGERS....

One other thing that I noticed when I reread the entire C and P Exam was this paragraph:

"The veteran stated doing well until about 1985 when she was stationed in Germany, specifically at Stuttgart and another serviceman that she does not know the name of she can only describe him as a AA/NA male who, more than likely than not, was at the rank of E-5 -raped her "

My question is the more than likely than not the fact that his rank was E-5, or the fact of the rape..? Which is more likely than not?

annahonda,

Welcome to Hadit.com .

The "more likely than not" will need to be viewed by the decision maker

as relating to the rape (MST) and not the rank of the perpetrator, in order

to help grant SC.

In regards to,

"

RECOMMENDATIONS:

"After reading the C-Folder , the electronic medical records and the medical literature it is reasonable to conclude that the veterans allegations of

manifesting PTSD as a result of sexual abuse(victim) are considered credible and the PTSD in question is fully linked to the service."

THIS PART ABOVE IS GOOD FOR YOUR CLAIM TO SC PTSD

BUT - then the examiner mucks it up with the part below,

"The conclusions of these reports are based purely on the veterans allegations.

This examiner does not have independent verifiable information as the veteran never reported the incident."

Does anything in your C-Folder, the electronic medical records or the medical literature, of record

support that the event occurred ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did submit alternative evidence on form 21-0781a.

Some of the things included medical reports four months ofter the incident showing suicidal ideations, and depression.

My security clearance was suspended do to work performance.

I have a statement from a roommate in the barracks who I told about the incident, she provided a statement and I have family statements noting changes they saw after the incident.

But I was seen for depression several times during the Army.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thought, If the VA conceded my stressor, could this statement be classified as a "Nexus" ?

"PTSD in question is fully linked to the service"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would certainly be a favorable nexus statement from the doctor. However it doesn't end with that.

This is a recent remand for a MST claim and the BVA refers to

VBA Fast letter No. 10-25 (July 15, 2010) in the remand. That fast letter should be here under our Fast Letter topic-if not I will find link and post it.It involves how the VA is supposed to handle MST claims.

As you can see the claim diagnosis was re -charaterized in this recent decision:

The diagnosis in this case doesn't matter as much as the evidence.

http://www4.va.gov/vetapp10/files3/1028680.txt

Do you have copies of your SMRs and your 201 file?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0