Philip Rogers

Found this site while looking for expected lifespans for Vietnam veterans. I'll be sending for the professional edition. Also found out the VA has charts that give our expected lifespans. Bet they use these charts when adjudicating claims. pr http://www.longtermcarelink.net/a16veterans_books.htm

I went to a 1st Cav reunion a couple of yrs ago, in Milwaukee, WI, and was very disappointed by the lack of Nam vets attending. Turned out to be mostly WW-II and Korean war vets. I won't go again. Not a good place to attend if you have an ETOH problem, as there are lots of "hospitality suites," with free beverages. pr

Free - there's usually a 2-3 yr deadline, from date of death, on asbestos claims. You'd be wise to contact one, soon. To my knowledge there is no limit on awards and attorneys still get 25% - 40%. Congress has been working on a bill for years but don't count on them for anything. pr

Free - have you considered hiring a private law firm that specializes in asbestos related claims? I think the James Sokolove lawfirm handles them for a percentage. pr

Should you need an SSDI rep I recommend you go to www.nosscr.org for an atty/rep in your area. Most reps want to make as much money versus time spent working as possible, which is why many want the claim denied, once or twice, first. An atty doesn't really speed it up but can save time because they know what SSDI is looking for. jmo Terry - Thanks for the compliment! I've ordered 4 of those books and should have them next week. I intend to go for an EED on my award - about 30 months retro. A little pricy but well worth it, if I can win. It would mean more work credits for me and a higher rate, plus the retro. pr

John, here's how I found out I had PTSD. It's the original pamphlet that was distributed by the DAV back in '87, by Jim Goodwin. Here's the link: http://www.trauma-pages.com/a/goodwin.php pr

I'll add something here. I've helped two vets get TDIU and both had been told repeatedly that 50% was the max for their condition. One had a skin condition and the other had to do with hearing. The point was that their s/c condition kept them from working. They both prevailed. When we requested extra-schedular consideration, the skin condition claim was sent to the Central office where they raised him to 60% (50% for the skin condition and 10% for the scarring it caused). He prevailed, even though his congressman couldn't get it increased years before. pr

Peter, thanks for the insurance info. pr

Peter, I figure it's roughly $40k they owe you. Definitely worth pursuing!!!! jmo pr

Peter, you shouldn't need a hearing. I'd just send a NOD disagreeing with the current award date, stating that they had made a "grave procedural error" and stating that it was an inferred issue in 1993 and that claim remains open. Tell them you are entitled to HB from 1993 to present. The HB was an inferred issue in the '93 100% award for agoraphobia and their failure to consider that issue is a grave procedural error. It's really a no brainer. jmo pr

That's great news, Peter!!! If, when you were awarded 100% schedular, they failed to decide the HB issue and include that decision, in your award letter, that claim remains open and you should be able to get the EED. As for the insurance, eligibility comes with each "new" SC disability and you have 2 yrs to pickup the insurance, with each "new" disability award. I don't believe HB counts as a new disability but just expands compensation for an already existing disability(s). I could be wrong but I don't think so. pr

Liz, first things first. Did you directly notify the VA of his death, right after it happened? If so, should they request payback, you should request a hardship waiver. If it's their error they will usually waive recovery. As for the TDIU and DIC, I agree w/Berta. One is for your service and the other a benefit of his service. I would fight that one all the way to the CAVC and further if necessary. pr

VA is federal and state laws don't effect them. As proof, you don't pay state sales tax on federal properties. pr

Terry, I've ordered 3 or 4 of the books and should have them in about 2 wks. Maybe then I'll be able to answer questions better. On a side note, ALLSUP just dropped my sister as a client. Apparently her case wasn't a slam dunk. Stupid people weren't even pursuing the PTSD claim aspect. Now I know why they win so many - they only take the "easy" claims. pr

If you want to know what was going on during the VN years read the medical digests, from those years. When I was researching scrub typhus I came across many medical journal reports warning the MD's of what to be on the lookout for in returning vets. Funny, they never told us!!! pr

I had one about 7 yrs ago, after avoiding it for yrs. Piece of cake - no pain or discomfort. They gave me something to make me relax, which worked really well. I was awake and watched the whole thing on the TV screen. Had to stay about an hour or so after it was over, to make sure I was ok, but nothing to fear. Brought home some photos. I wouldn't volunteer for one every week but every 5 yrs or so, it's a good idea. pr

Tammy, how much money would it take to make it possibe for you to go see your son graduate Basic??? I was thinking if it wasn't too much I might send it to you but then again, you are 100% and have a good income, also?? Hmmmmmmmmmmm. pr

Tammy - I'm questioning your comment on Chap 35. Are you saying because they are grown they didn't get Chap 35??? Chap 35 can be awarded to dependents aged 31 and above with a waiver. pr

ALERT FOR VETERANS WHO HAVE BEEN INJURED AT A VA MEDICAL CENTER If you were injured while waiting for treatment at a VA Hospital before Oct. 1, ‘97, and if you filed a claim, before Oct. 1, ‘97, under 38 USC 1151, for VA benefits to compensate you for your injury you should read what follows very carefully. Most claims by veterans who were hurt, while waiting for treatment and who filed a claim before Oct. 1, ‘97, had their claim denied by the VA because the VA determined that the injury was unrelated to the treatment. For some veterans the law has now changed in their favor because of the case of Jackson v. Nicholson, decided Dec. 30, ‘05 by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.. Jackson who was verbally and physically assaulted by a patient while waiting for therapy had her claim rejected based on the determination by the VA and the Veterans Court that the assault was an "intervening cause" and was not the result of VA actions relying on SWEITZER v. BROWN, 5 Vet App 503,506 (1996). SWEITZER had been injured by a patient in a wheel chair while reading an ad on a bulletin board after checking in at a VA Hospital. In his case the VA’s denial of the claim was upheld by the Court because the injury did not result from having "submitted to an exam". In deciding that the VA was wrong in rejecting Jackson’s claim, the Federal Circuit said that the word "hospitalization" which is in the statute refers to one who is in the hospital and does not require that the injuries be caused by the actions of the VA. What this means for veterans, is that a veteran who filed a claim, before Oct. 1, ‘97, for benefits resulting from an injury in the hospital, and who was denied, can reopen their claim because of clear and unmistakable error committed by the VA in denying the claim.

Tammy, you asked about this last week and many answered, requesting more info. Apparently you didn't read or chose not to respond in that thread??? What's up with that? pr

John, whatever you are service connected for, from 1973, is protected as to the service connected issue, except for fraud. They could try to reduce the percentage but it's not something to worry about, now. If it ever happens, it can, for the most part, be stopped. pr

Found these on-line and thought someone pursuing a claim might want to purchase. http://www.jamespublishing.com/subject/ss.htm pr

I agree John. The key is to stop the reduction attempt in it's tracks but failing that, you're right, the VA is supposed to consider TDIU. It is important to request a hearing during that first 30 day period in order to stop the reduction. That gives the veteran time to get additional supportive evidence. I helped someone here about 2 yrs ago and we stopped the proposed reduction, from 50% to 0%, and got them rated up to 100%, w/P&T. jmo pr

jangrin, read 38 CFR 4.16b for your answer. pr

The medals are only good for proving a stressor likely happened for a PTSD claim or perhaps if he's claiming some other injury that happened while engaged in combat. He can still request an update on his awards, though. Additional medals don't bring more compensation, not even a free cup of coffee. pr