Dbqs

[concern]

Do anybody know of doctors filling out the new DBQs for claims

[ArNG11]

Good luck with that. So far I have asked two of my long time treating physicians to help me in filling these out and I was referred to other agencies. From what I have seen, some doctors do not want to put their professional opinion and diagnosis for a VA claim. Also they seem to not want to take 30 to 45 minutes of their time to fill out these DBQ's. Most of the information can be filled out from your treatment records so I do not understand the resistance.

[concern]

Thank you both

[john999]

If you want a good IMO/IME be ready to pay for it.

[vern2]

I have had my 2 cardio doctors fill out the DBQ and do separate letter, one was military and other was private doctor.

[FormerMember]

Something many of you do not understand as you begin your VA claims journey, is the duty to assist incorporated into 38 USC and 38 CFR. The VA is required by law to help you develop your claim by doing exactly what they are now asking you to do. While I would never depend on them to round up my civilian medical records or Social Security documents, they are, by law, required to do so.

In an effort to "speed up" the process, as they like to say, VA has put the onus of doing so on you-unfairly. It may speed up a claim by a few weeks or months but make no mistake about it. It does not improve your chance of winning. If anything, it reduces it.

Vets are often extremely depleted financially as they approach a claim adjudication. The longer it goes on, the more desperate (and destitute) many become. This new procedure proposes to give you what you seek sooner. All well and fine if it were so. Vets overlook the most obvious thing staring them in the face. VA denies 85% of all claims submitted initially-or, looking at it from the obverse, they approve 15%. After remands, appeals etc, the figure ascends to 22% approved. That takes years so any time gained in the initial filing is a wasted effort once denied. After an appeal to the CAVC, the figure jumps to 35%. Has your VSO mentioned that?

Probably the most disheartening thing about all this is that many legitimate claims go into the trash can after the first denial when Vets realize it is a rigged game. They simply walk away! For those who appeal to the BVA, the success rate increases marginally, but again, the dice are loaded. This is preplanned. VA winnows out all but the hard core Vets willing to stay the course. For those, a win is inevitable but time consuming. Look no further than my 20 year battle with them for benefits on one claim alone.

The DBQ is a cruel hoax as there is no box for the IMO/nexus. A doctor filling this out would surmise there is no need for one. If a Vet is naive, he, too, would not know to admonish the doctor to be sure to add one. Many of you are aware of it but can you say that for the FNG who just got here and missed the briefing?

At the congressional hearings last year, a Congressman pointed out the absence of box for an IMO/nexus. Under Secretary for Benefits Allison B. Hickey apologized for this and said new forms would have this important feature but that they would have to use up the old ones first. Think about that statement. The forms are on line, not in print form. Modifying them would take little or no time whatsoever. What does this tell you about the claims process? Helloooooooooooooo?

The downside of a DBQ, aside from what is mentioned above, is that it encourages haste in claims processing. It the error rate, which is currently 60% was egregious before, what does anyone expect in the future? They clearly state on Ebenefits that Fully Developed Claims (FDCs) containing the new DBQs will be rated based on what you submit, not what VA assembles. Thus the Veteran is responsible now for correctly assembling and submitting his own claim. Duty to assist just became an antiquated concept. If your claim is deficient in some respect due to VA being unable to obtain STRs from St. Louis and the NPRC- Bingo. You lose. You simply find out you lost sooner with your shiny FDC. It does not ensure accuracy. It does not do anything to reduce errors. In fact, the new VBMS conversion to electronic records keeping has a downside. Where before you could take apart a C-file and view documents individually side by side, the new method allows you to view one document at a time. It makes it more difficult to jump back and forth and corroborate facts to ascertain the veracity of what you claim. This is claims processing 101 at Geico or Allstate.

The long and the short of all this is that if you are not financially strapped, it may be much more advantageous for Vets to simply submit claims the old fashioned way so the documents- and the IMOs/nexus letters- are prominently displayed as an individual document so the rater(s) can view it individually. They already have a storied reputation for "top-sheeting" claims by reading as little as possible in the first several documents to arrive at a flawed decision. DBQs may seem to organize and corral the important information but they do not capture the essence of the claim from service. DBQs do not identify the first ingredient needed in the claim- a disease or injury in service. This is where most claims fail and the VA does not even address this. VSOs fall in right behind the VA and herald the importance of the DBQ without impressing on the Veteran that the first key ingredient is lacking.

Record keeping in the military is woefully sparse. VA thinks Field hospitals and air evac pads have shiny stainless steel cabinets and white-suited orderlies running around filing things promptly. That might be more prevalent now, but during the Vietnam "conflict", record keeping was woefully inadequate or nonexistent. VA, nevertheless, applies the same set of criteria now to that former era. Thus, you lose a claim for Hepatitis C because there's no evidence of HCV in your STRs from 1968. VA conveniently ignores that it wasn't "discovered" until 1989.

VA's claims mantra is simple-No tickee-no laundry. Before you file, do what lawyers call "discovery". Obtain your STRs from St. Louis and find out what you need that may be missing. You may sadly discover that the records from your service in 1991 in Kuwait burned up in the great NPRC fire on July 13th, 1973. Shit happens. And it happens more frequently at the VA, apparently. That's who you are dealing with.

[rpowell01]

I had a medical opinion completed by Dr. Bash last year and the VA still denied everything. What I find funny is on the DBQs that C&P Examiners do it reads that "This is not an medical opinion"...So, if an MD specialist such as Dr. Bash writes a medical opinion but the C&P Exams report reads "This is not a medical opinion" then how can deny the claims? A lot of these raters just don't know what they are reading and don't know what they are doing. Bad thing is they are going to get hit with a lot of CUEs because of this.

I also found out some of the so called MDs that the VA is using for C&P Exams are not even license and/or had their licensed suspended indefinitely. How is this legal that the VA is allowed to use these doctors who don't even have a license? I heard this from great source but my memory is killing me because I can't even remember who told me this. Is this legal?

BTW there is an Orthopedic Surgeon in Tampa at Florida Spine Institute that will do the DBQ for you. They charge $300 and I think he will write an opinion also. There is a sign on the door or in his office about this. I am going to do call about this and see what he does.

Edited October 6, 2013 by rpowell01