Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts
Read Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules
EricHughes
-
Posts
54 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
VA Disability and Benefits Information
VA Benefits News
Store
Posts posted by EricHughes
-
-
Can you file for Fibromyalgia and chronic Pain Syndrome without it being considered pyramiding.
You can file for anything. But I'd call it pyramiding. So odds are the VA will as well. Also, consider the risk that they will lower you rating if you file.
-
Does anyone else that trained at the bivauc area out side Sheppard AFB in OK wonder why the training area was so barren and the side where we were camped was nice and lush and green? I was there in Feb. of 1971 and I believe that some type of herbicide was used there.
All known releases of Dioxin (Agent Orange) are required to be reported to the EPA. I suggest that you file a FOIA with the EPA seeking all known dioxin releases at Sheppard AFB. Then be sure to give the results of your FOIA to the Vietnam Veterans of America and this forum in addition to sending the reports to the VA.
-
The CAVC remanded my claim back to the BVA in 2010 to find more consent, because the consent the VA offered, a letter from 1998, the CAVC ruled insufficient, because it didn't meet the consent requirements as stated in 17.32 of 38 usc. Anyway, the other day, November 3rd, 2011, I got a denial from the AMC, (who the BVA gave the remanded case to), and the AMC denied me again, based on that very same letter from 1998 that the CAVC found insufficient as consent. What do I do know? I sent a letter to the AMC letting them know I will be appealing this denial, which I think procedurley was just to cover my A_s in the event they try to say I didn't follow procedure, and then I sent a letter to the CAVC, the BVA, and the AMC letting them all know of the mistake. With the letters I highlighted the old CAVC remand that said that letter was insufficient. That's all I know to do. Any ideas?
You need to hire an attorney if you don't already have one. Otherwise you will just end up back on the treadmill.
-
Dan,
I don't think this is the correct place to discuss SPN/SPD or RE codes since they do not concern the VA in a -official- capacity. Though, I've heard stories about them having an impact in some VISN's. If you have questions on SPN/SPD codes your best place to start looking for answers is at www.veterancourtcodes.com That site is dedicated to the kinds of issues that you are asking about.
As for the advice I personally have for you.....
You are very angry. That is understandable. But this happened over 33 years ago. You would be wise to let go of the injustice of the -past-, such that you can focus on the injustice of the present.
The SPD code KDB is for a "Hardship" discharge. There is nothing negative there. It is the correct code for a hardship discharge.
The RE-Code 4E indicates a non-waiverable bar to reenlistment this is typically given for medical reasons. Frankly, after 33 years, and given your stated medical condition, I don't think you are going to try to reenlist so again, nothing negative there.
Neither separation code merits "Better" treatment. But they don't indicate that you should get worse treatment either. I've known horror cases relating to SPD/SPN codes. This isn't one of them.
The Reenlistment Code RE-4E is a blessing in disguise. You can use that to document in service diagnosis of your injury for the purposes of service connection.
Hi, everyone. I have a little story and need help with fixing it.
USAF 1974-1979 was on second enlistment, ran into trouble with trumped up AWOL charges, Congressman got evolved, I was told to accept a Article 15 or go to Fort Leavenworth. So I signed off
Then I found out that it was bogus and set up too send me to jail. (ALL for telling the LT Col (Holloman AFB), he was a drunk that was worthless, of coarse I asked for permission to speak freely before
I answered his question on why, him and I didn't see eye to eye on things. He, behind my back, faked records, threatened my supervisor, forced him to go on leave, pushed and faked the hearings, all the
while i was home on emergency leave (red cross verified, because my Dad died) .
SNEAKY thing he did was being a LT COL, I was allowed emergency leave without leave papers because of his rank. So I had no leaves papers, but my supervisor knew i was allowed leave and let me go home.
The Col even evolved the JAG in the fraud. I went though to lawyers while i sat in the brig trying to get someone to believe my story that I was on leave and not AWOL . Finally after my first attorney quit and my new
attorney was a woman who must have believed me at least a little bit, she tried to find out if my story was true or not. She ran into STONE WALL after STONE WALL. My commander wouldn't even tell her and had
given oreder to all personal that they were not to speak with her or give her any information. In the men time my mom had contacted Congressman Jim Leach and his office contacted my Lawyer directly, they worked
together to find my supervisor and get his testimony that I was on official leave and not AWOL. And that he had been forced to take 90 days leave so he would not be around to testify that I was on proper and legal leave
and not AWOL.
When congressman Jim LEACH got evolved and found out its was all fake / trumped up charges, I was offered duty world wide, or a honorable discharge that day. Being so scared and traumatized by sitting in jail on trumped up
charges that went all the way to the bases JAG commander. I took the Discharge and was hand processed out that very day, with what i thought was a full honorable discharge and that I could reenlist if i chose too.
Well I didn't' but I did file for benefits due to a back injury, concussion and wrist injuries sustained in a military vehicle accident in Guam in 1977 upon my discharge. I did file for disability in 1980, 3 months after my discharge
and they turned me down ! because they say I didnt show up for my appointment. They sent my notice of appt to the wrong address. I wrote them back requesting a new appt date and they told me I was not allowed to and I lost
all benefits.
35 yrs later my spinal damage I received from a Vehicle accident in Guam has/had finally caused my legs not to work properly anymore. So In 1999 my back got sooo bad that i really couldn't walk anymore and I refiled with the VA in 2007
and they approved me at 60% service connected disabled. I refiled for 100% and 100% unemployability and was turned down. The Social Security Administration has me at 100% disabled since I can't walk and have sever restrictions
in strength in my arm, legs and the pain is blinding, without meds to somewhat keep it in check. But I can't drive on pain meds and I cant work because of the injuries, but he VA refuses to give at least unemployability. I have sever hearing lose
due to service connection, but have been waiting over a year to receive any notice back from them. I also have sever ringing in my ears and that is also filed and I have heard nothing back on that claim either. I keep getting a computer generated
letter stating they are sorry but still looking into it.
HELL I cant even walk to get my mail, but I have an attorney working on it, but I think he is turning out to be a scammer, because he is in no hurry to file my case. He won't return my calls and when I talk with his secretary she says next week we will
call you. and never does. I did get a copy of my medical records showing I had a concussion, wrist damage and spinal trauma due to the accident . But I really need sooooo much more help that I earned and they are stone walling me, and even have
the local VA hospital, intimidating me, calling me a malinger and refuses to help me with medical issues and tries to get me to take Psychotropics. HELL I can't even walk to the hospital appts anymore, it hurts toooo bad. So I try to stay away from the
VA as much as possible. One because of pain and two because I trust no one at all. I'm almost paranoid because they threaten, lie, mislead and cover up so much. I think they want me to die off fast. I asked for help to get a motorized wheel chair and
I was threatened by the medical staff , that if I applied, that they would put me in a nursing home. !!! So I dropped that Idea and am trying to get one through the Medi cal. instead.
ALL of this for a stupid injury I DONT TRUST THESE SUCKERS AT ALL. OH I just found out that my SPD CODE is KDB and my reinlistment code is a 4E. I have been told that I do not deserve any better treatment because of these Separation codes
Got any ideas on what someone like me can do?
-
Without the paperwork right in front of me, I want to say the discharge says AFM 39.12. It is General under Honorable Conditions. The discharge was not for a court martial or disciplinary action, I had already satisfactorily completed retraining and rehabilitation and was on regular duty. I thought I was getting a Hardship Discharge, but it was a "PD", unable to adapt.
Eric, I contacted a NOVA attorney and will meet with her soon. I find it interesting that a) their services are FREE and b) they deal with a DRO. They do not handle appeals at the BVA. Thanks for the info.
NOVA attorney's are generally Pro-Veteran. They will often take cases prior to the NOD pro bono. I however distrust attorneys that are not NOVA, or that practice "Elder Law" and do VA claims work on the side. The later are often selling services to transfer assets to artificially qualify for VA pension. While legal, I don't think that is the congressional intent.
-
I think your best bet would be to ask for secondary depression/pain disorder based on your SC back condition to get you to TDIU. You do this with an IMO as Hoppy said. After almost 40 years this is probably the only way to get it. What Chapter was your discharge? Was it for a PD or result of courts martial? Did you get an honorable discharge? You can have a PD diagnosis and have depression or even a psychotic or neurotic disorder superimposed on it. Start with what you already have in the bag and expand from there.
Your particular situation screams for the help of a NOVA advocate. It will require a lot of time to properly develop, and the NOVA advocates typically have smaller case loads than a NSO from a veteran's service organization. Thus, they have the ability to provide the time and attention your case requires.
What I think John is getting at is that you need to EITHER show that the pattern of depression continued since active duty. Or that the current depression is related to a service connected condition. It will be easier to show a secondary cause at this time. However, if your depression is recurrent and part of a continued pattern of recurrence that started while on active service -as in a bi-polar- diagnosis then you could get direct service connection. One thing to consider is do you have any service records that are new and material to your claim? If you do, a good advocate can get the VA to get an earlier effective date. One place to look is to request via FOIA the daily desk logs for the dates surrounding your AWOL, and Court Marshal. They may have evidence in them that are not part of the VA record that can drasticlly help you. Your advocate should have info on how to request them.
-
You don't need to overcome a PD discharge to get VA compensation. I did it. You need medical facts to show that you had compensable mental health issue in the military or within one year of discharge.
True. But if the ro has attributed your symptoms to PD you are better off looking for something on the smr that the no or ro missed that supports your diagnosis than challenging the nurses report. If you need to challenge the nurses report see my thread Daubert v Merrell Dow in the claims research forum.
-
First question: What did you specifically get into trouble for while on active duty?
Second question: How long ago where you discharged?
Third question: when where you diagnosed with these illnesses?
-
First the VA is allowed to use there own experts. Second, personality disorder discharges are very hard to overcome. To have any hope of winning you need to prove your symptoms are not do to a personality disorder. That is hard to do. I will try and post more once I get home since typing on an iPhone is clunky at best.
-
Hi, long time since I've posted here. I got shot down in March, denied on all counts, and I've not been handling it so well. But, it is better, and I refuse to quit.
I got in some trouble when I was in the Air Force. I believe it is because of the onset back then of possibly depression/chronic pain disorder and Obstructive Sleep Apnea. (OSA was unknown to the medical community back then, so was Chronic Pain Disorder, but my SMR's cite many of the symptoms that would lead to those diagnoses.)
The C&P N.P. shrew, in her report, began it with a long review of my disciplinary problems while on active duty. She wrote it in a way that would make me look awful, right off the bat, to anyone reading the report.
Personally, this seems unethical to me. I never saw where the VARO requested a recap of my personal conduct record, I thought they simply requested a medical examination/review.
I know we're talking about a VA N.P., but even for one of those, this just seems wrong.
For the record, I received an Honorable Discharge, and was told at the time it was for hardship, but much later I learned that some quack Psychiatrist (whom I never saw) and my C.O. had actually discharged me as "unable to adapt", claiming I exhibited symptoms of several disorders, hence a diagnosis of "Personality Disorder N.O.S.". He claimed that I said if I didn't get out I would "just keep getting into fights". Only fight I ever got into was with a punk who poured hot coffee on me.
-
What is the typical turn around time for VA to accept an application for Chapter 31, and set a first appointment?
-
I tried Google and came up with several possibilities. One was small unit riverine craft ( SURC) is rigid-hull, armed and armored patrol boat used by the U.S. Marines and U.S. Navy to maintain control of rivers and inland...
One was a connection to Iphone. Another had that SURC stood for surcharge. These were all that I looked at. There may be other definitions for SURC.
If it is in a medical record, it probably is "SURG" for Surgery.
-
Very helpful. Myler v Derwinski was exactly what I was looking for.
-
Thanks for the heads up on the PEB. That pretty much confirmed what I thought. If I go the PEB route, I still would have to go back to the VA with the new PEB rating in hand for a change in my current rating. I don't think it would make a benefits difference on the DoD side of things at all. And it would be an expensive pain in the but to go through. But it is still an option, if not a very good one.
-
Eric,
Nol doubt about it, just send it in you have a sure fire winner there!
I was totally wrong and your expertise is beyond reproach.
Good Luck to you in the future.
Please be sure to send in an update !
NSa-Saigon-ET
NSA-Saigon-ET, Both your reality checks and everybody questioning helped a whole lot. I really mean that. I knew I had something. But I had to dig into the c-file to find what I was missing.
-
I can tell you that if evidence is part of the record and the VA ignores or excludes that particular evidence in their rating decision that is a basis for a CUE. It is not the whole ball game since the evidence excluded must be of such nature that it would undebatable change the outcome of a decision. If evidence of record is not listed or mentioned than it was not used in the rating. The BVA admitted that in my CUE. The VA cannot cherry pick which evidence it will use and which it will not use. If they could no claims would ever be granted.
Eric
Your case is hard to follow. If it is hard for us to follow here I think the VA will just stamp it "denied" and send it back to you. Hire a lawyer. Unless it is something like "you lost a foot in Vietnam. The VA says it was your arm you lost" you need help from a legal mind.
Does this clear things up? Or have I simply confused everybody beyond recovery?
To Whom It May Concern:
Veteran claims a Clear and Unmistakable Error was made on August 24, 2001, and August 4, 2004 rating decisions for benefits.
Nature of the Error:
In the spring of 1999, veteran was on active duty with the US Army and was referred to the MEB for separation due to asthma that was incurred in the line of duty. After the veteran’s file was referred to the MEB, but before his discharge from service, veteran was treated numerous times for exacerbation of his asthma. This included five trips to the Ft. Bragg Emergency Department including one hospitalization for acute asthma. Each time he was prescribed Prednisone, a corticosteroid. Records of the ED trips or the hospitalization where not brought before the MEB. Veteran was medically retired on September 21, 2001 with MEB awarded asthma rating of 30% absent information regarding his intermittent need for Corticosteroids.
Just 18 days after separation, on October 6 1999, veteran filed for Service Connection for his asthma and a few other uncontested conditions. It took the VA until August 24, 2001 to render a decision on this original claim for disability. At that time the VA awarded SC for incurred asthma rated at 30% disabling. Even though the MEB rated the veteran at 30% disabling by the Army MEB, claimant contends VA should have Service Connected the veteran at 60% disabling for asthma effective September 22, 1999 based upon the Service Medical Records generated after the veteran was referred to the MEB.
On November 15, 1999 veteran responded to a letter from VA asking for clarification of what disabilities he was claiming. He submitted a VA Form 21-4138, Statement in Support of Claim, with an attached letter of explanation. It is in the C-File and date stamped “Received” November 22, 1999. In the statement in support of claim veteran specifically drew attention to his prednisone prescriptions. However, this Form 21-4138 was not listed as evidence before the RO in the rating decision.
Subsequently claimant requested an award for TDIU on May 22, 2003. Claimant’s request for TDIU was denied based solely on his failure to meet the minimum service connected disability requirements set forth by 38 CFR 4.16. However, if he had been awarded the correct rating of 60% for asthma in his original claim, the August 4, 2004 outcome of the May 22, 2003 request for benefits would have been manifestly different.
Standard of Review
The United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) has held that there is a three-pronged test to determine whether CUE is present in a prior determination: (1) "[e]ither the correct facts, as they were known at the time, were not before the adjudicator (i.e., more than a simple disagreement as to how the facts were weighed or evaluated) or the statutory or regulatory provisions extant at the time were incorrectly applied," (2) the error must be "undebatable" and of the sort "which, had it not been made, would have manifestly changed the outcome at the time it was made," and (3) a determination that there was CUE must be based on the record and law that existed at the time of the prior adjudication in question. Damrel v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 242, 245 (1994) (quoting Russell v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 310, 313-14 (1992) (en banc)).
CUE in August 24, 2001 decision:
Element 1(a)i: Facts as they where known at the time:
On October 6, 2011 the claimant was reviewing an electronic copy of his C-File and noticed five clinical notes in the Service Medical Record referring to the prescription of “Prednisone”, a corticosteroid for treatment of his SC Asthma condition. These clinical notes are June 24, 1999, June 7, 1999, and three dates that are illegible. Then on October 13, 2011 claimant also located within his electronic C-File active duty prescription records. They clearly show three separate prescriptions for Prednisone in the active duty period twelve months directly prior the effective date of service connection for Asthma and also the date of separation from active service.
Drug
Prescription #
Order #
Doctor
Date
Prednisone
M114701254
990707-05953
Arnold, Gerald
07 July 1999
Prednisone
M11647567
990612-00420
Duffy, Tim
12 June 1999
Prednisone
M11586932
990412-02520
Jaffe, Burton
12 April 1999
Veteran reported two additional prednisone bursts prescribed by Womack Army Medical Center at Ft. Bragg but the substantiating prescription records have been lost from the SMR.
Element 1(a)ii Facts as they were before the adjudicator
August 24, 2001 findings of facts state “He reported to the emergency room on three occasions for asthma attacks and received treatment numerous times for exacerbations.” Absent from the discussion of facts is the claimant’s prescription record for Prednisone. Also absent from the list of evidence is the veteran’s November 15, 1999 Statement in Support of Claim.
Element 2(a) Undebateable Error:
The absence of this significant fact, from the reasons and basis discussion for the asthma disability rating is undebateable. Also undebateable is the absence of the veteran’s Statement in Support of Claim -that high lights his prednisone bursts- from the evidence of record.
Element 2(b) Manifest Difference:
In 2001, to this day, a rating of 60% is warranted when an FEV-1 of 40-55 percent predicted; or FEV-1/FVC of 40 to 55 percent; or at least monthly visits to a physician for required care of exacerbations; or intermittent (at least three per year) course of systemic corticosteroids. [underlining added for emphasis] Note the use of the term “Is warranted” as opposed to the term “Will be considered” used at the 100% rating level. Unlike the latter, the former indicates a non-optional disability award when the conditions are met.
Element 3: Compliance with law at time of error:
In developing the case, it is essential to obtain medical findings that are stated in terms conforming to the applicable rating criteria. See Massey v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 204 (1994). By failing to include within the discussion of facts, the veteran’s need and usage of corticosteroid bursts in the twelve months prior to separation from service/effective date of disability, the RO failed to comply with caselaw as it existed at the time of error.
CUE in August 4, 2004 decision
Element 1(a)i Facts as they where known at the time
For the reasons detailed above, the facts at the time of the August 4, 2004 rating decision was that the veteran was using prednisone or another corticosteroid to control his asthma condition an average of three times per year. This should have been sufficient to grant a disability rating for asthma of 60%.
Element 1(a)ii Facts as they where known to the adjudicator
The adjudicator cites no facts regarding the veterans TDIU claim other than the lack of either a single 60% disability rating, or two 40% disability ratings with a net disability rating total of 70% or more as required by 38 CFR 4.16
Element 2(a) Undebateable Error:
Denial of the veteran’s TDIU claim on the basis that the veteran did not meet the minimum disability rating standards set fourth in 38 CFR 4.16 is only valid to the extent that the history of the veteran’s disability is valid. The medical opinion shall be rejected when the history upon which it is based in inaccurate. Swann v Brown 5 Vet. App. 229 (1993). In this case the RO’s August 4, 2004 error was predicated upon the above detailed factual error within the record.
Element 2(b) Manifest Difference:
The decision to grant or deny a request for TDIU is an all or nothing decision that carries with it an implicit manifest difference in outcome.
Element 3 Compliance with law at time of error:
This is an error of pure fact, not an error of law. The facts before the adjudicator where inaccurate. The error of fact having been corrected in the record, demands a change in outcome.
Additional Considerations
Within the Official VA Claim File there is a computer Screen Shot dated June 6, 2006 with a date time stamp of 2:48 PM taken from the computer of an Irene Wilson. Mrs. Wilson’s hand written note indicates that the veterans MEB file was located inside another veteran’s C-File. And through out the veteran’s C-File there are date-time stamps showing dates of “Discovery” of various documents in 2006. The presence of this revelation in association with the RO’s failure to list relevant facts is unsettling.
Wherefore, for the above-mentioned causes, claimant submits his claim for retroactive revision of the August 21, 2001 and August 4, 2004 rating decisions. He seeks the full sum of back pay due.
-
Eric,
Now I'm really confused, as your prior post states,
16 October 2011 - 05:47 PM
"I am currently service connected for Sleep Apnea @ 50%, Asthma @ 30%, Degenerative Disk Disease @ 20%, Throatic Strain @ 20%,
Never mind, thanks for everyone's help. Obviously this is more confusing than it needs to be absent everyone having a copy of all rating decisions.
-
Eric,
Ok, that makes more sense now.and I can comment on the claim.
The rater is supposed to see the big picture as to your medical condition when adjudicating your claim. Their reasons for the award of 30% were spelled out pretty clearly from what I read in your posts. The criteria for the higher rating was not met in their decision and if you look at the alternative criteria for treatments it specifies at least three as a bare minimum. The VA likes to see supporting evidence in addition to just one requirement being met. This is similar to a vet with PTSD and receiving a GAF score of 30, but only being awarded a 50% rating. The GAF score is but one element. I realize what the regulation states as warranted, but there again it is up to the rater to add up all the evidence to see the big picture. Then if it fits into the category you will be awarded the higher rating.
NSA-Saigon-ET
In 2004 I won a 60% rating for asthma using my prescription record at the DRO level using a format very similar to this one. While I understand that the VA likes to see more evidence at the RO level, such rating behavior is Capricious under the law.
-
Eric, what was your DLCO reading in 99?
J
No DLCO test was performed.
-
Post the link to Massey - it makes our volunteer work time a bit easier.
The case is archived, so there is no link to share. However, I will copy and paste the holding:
"Rather, the Board's findings relate to rating criteria which are almost entirely outside the DC 9405 criteria. The rating criteria require no findings as to alertness, coherence, evidence of psychosis, affect, mood, or memory. Nevertheless, the Board found discussion of these factors to be probative. For example, the Board found persuasive the fact that the appellant had not been hospitalized for his disability and showed "no evidence of psychosis." Yet, nowhere in the rating formula is there any requirement regarding hospitalization or psychosis. On the other hand, the Board determined that there was "some evidence of poor abstraction ability, as evidenced by the [appellant's] tendency to be somewhat concrete in his thinking." Although abstraction ability and concrete thinking appear to relate to the DC 9405 criterion of lack of "flexibility," the Board was clearly erroneous in its conclusion that the appellant was "somewhat concrete in his thinking." To the contrary, the only evidence of record showed that the appellant's "abstract thinking is extremely concrete", that he has "poor abstract thought," and that he "tends to be concrete in thinking". We thus reverse that conclusion. See 38 U.S.C. § 7261(a)(4) (Court to reverse "clearly erroneous" findings of the Board).
"The Board's consideration of factors which are wholly outside the rating criteria provided by the regulations is error as a matter of law. Pernorio v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 625, 628 (1992). "In using a standard that exceeded that found in the regulation, the Board committed legal error." Id. Therefore, the case will be remanded for the Board to be readjudicated under the correct DC criteria."
-
I understand this has been frustrating to you folks. But I sincerely appreciate your patience. You really are helping me to clairify the facts.
As you don't have the 2001 rating decision, you are missing one important thing.
I received a 30% disability rating for asthma from the MEB and was retired on 21 Sept 1999.
On October 9, 1999, I filed for SC with the VA. It took the VA until 2001 to rate the original claim for SC.
The -original- error was that the prednisone bursts in the 1999 SMR appear to have not been forwarded to the MEB. Thus the MEB rating of 30%. But this should have been picked up on when the VA reviewed the SMR for their own rating in 2001 based on the SMR's and granting a SC effective date of 22 Sept 1999 for asthma.
Bottom line, the MEB created an error. The VA failed to catch the error as required by case law. Massey v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 204 (1994) specifically.
-
As you know NSOs fall under the regulations within 38 USC 14.633 in order to become fully accredited with the VA.
I am quite familiar with these regs and have conversed with the VA lawyer who wrote them as they changed a little some years ago.
NVLSP provides the training for many of the prominent NSO vet orgs.
I worked for lawyers for 7 years. Anything I learned regarding civil or criminal case law did not help me one bit when I got into the world of VAOLA.
However the Conrad Murray Trial running on CNN regarding Michael Jackson's death is an absolute template for anyone here with an FTCA case or 1151 claim -to understand what the Standards of proper medical care involve regarding any FTCA (negligence /malpractice claims) against the VA because although the case has nothing to do with the VA of course,
these are the same standards of care that impact on any veteran who deals with the VA health care system as well as on any American getting health care from Any health care provider.
VA regs and case law are a whole new ball game when compared to civil and criminal procedure and case law.
Good luck in your pursuit!
Yea, I agree it is a whole different game. But I went into my paralegal certificate looking to play the VA game. So, I took the option to focus on those skills that do cross over.
Thanks for the encouragement!
-
SC for PTSD? Have asthma? Need a nexus? Try submitting this with your claim and asking for an Expert Medical Opinion to see if the study applies to your situation.
-
I've won a "Best Lawyer" award, but I'm not an attorney.
I am not yet an agent, but I sit for the exam at the end of the week.
I am not an NSO, but I have applied for an NSO position recently.
I by no means have a broad basis of knowledge, but I have a great deal of depth of knowledge in some areas.
I served in Korea in 1997 - 1998 and survived the great flash flood nobody in the states has heard of.
I served a year at Ft Bragg, and despite work with the Golden Knights I never jumped out of an airplane.
I'm an EMT, but due to asthma can not practice as such.
I have a degree in psychology, but I am not a psychologist.
As you can see, I'm not a lot of things. But I am a paralegal.
Have You Been Denied Because It Was Too Long Since Service?
in VA Disability Claims Research
Posted
The VA is under no obligation to grant Service Connection to a claim that has not been "Continuous". That said, you need to focus on establishing that your condition was indeed continueous.
First question: Have you submitted a statement in support of claim relaying to the VA what you relayed to us here? Namely that you where self medicating, and self treating?
Second question: Is there someone that you have known closely over the period of time from separation to present that can verify your history? This person need not be a doctor or other expert. But if they are not an expert then they should only state facts that the lay person can observe. For example.... They should not say, "I believe the veteran was depressed". Rather they should state WHY they believed that the veteran was depressed. Example: Veteran would go through periods of time where he would sleep for X hours of the day......