free_spirit_etc

"Permanent means the condition just isn't going to get better in the forseeable future. It doesn't mean that the disability warrants a hiegher evalution. One could have a knee disability rated at 20% with it being considered permanent. When VA says some conditionis permanent, that means they probably aren't going to take a look at it again in the future unless the veteran applies for an increase. Also, if the issue on appeal was service-connection and not the amount assigned as an evaluation, then it is considered a full grant of benefits sought on appeal. When the issue is just service-connection, you can't do any better than that!" Vike 17

Has he been getting continuing treatment for his lower back through the years? Did his injury lifting the barrels affect his cervical spine? Has he been in treatment for the nervous condition? And if he had that before he went in - you would have to be able to show that his military service worsened the condition. You've got over 30 intervening years to cover though --so it could be quite a challenge to create the nexus. I think that it is great that you are so supportive of your brother! B) I think you would really have your work cut out for you in making this claim stick with the VA. Of course, there is a lot of information I don't know about your brother, his health, etc. As to the lung cancer. Was he in Vietnam? On the other conditions -you might want to talk to his doctors and see if they think they could be related to the service. Have you considered seeing about increasing his pension -- if he is housebound or needs aid and attendence? Free

Josephine, Did you ever hear from them? Can they help? Free

IRIS REQUEST: My husband requested copies of his C-file last year, and made a limited request for a copy of his discharge physical - relying on information that he might be able to get a copy of his discharge physical quicker than he would be able to get the rest of the C-file. I also requested both after his death. I understand it takes quite some time to process these requests. However, I would like to see if a copy of his discharge physical can be located and sent to me as soon as possible. I had an appointment at the VA Friday, July 2007 at 9 am to view my husband's C-file. I had assumed I would be able to at least see and read his dicharge physical on that appointment. However, we could not locate the discharge physical in his C-file. The Service Medical Records didn't seem to be in any kind of chronological order. I couldn't figure out what kind of order they were in - but I made sure to leave them in the same order as they were in the file. But I looked all through the SMRs and was not able to locate the discharge physical. XXX also helped me look - but could not find it. I know there was one in his file at some point because a couple of his C&P exam reports reference the discharge physical. It was pretty disappointing not being able to even see the report that we have been requesting for a year, after driving a 10 hour round trip to do so. As that was the only paper in the file I was specifically trying to locate, and we could not find it in the SMR's - could someone please locate my husband's discharge physical and send me a copy when they do? Thank you, XXX IRIS RESPONSE: Dear xxx: At the time of your visit and review of the claims folder any and all information was in the c file at that time. We have no way of locating a discharge physical for your husband. If he did not submit a discharge physical to us at the time he initially applied for benefits we would not have this information. You reviewed the entire folder. The document you speak of wasn't there. There is nothing else that we can do. We will send you an application that you may contact the military and they may still have a copy of his discharge physical. But no veteran is required to bring a copy of such or file a discharge physical with the VA upon their discharge from the military. Thank you for using our website. Sincerely yours, xxxx IRIS REQUEST Thank you for your response to my inquiry. My husband went to the base he retired from and got a copy of all of his post service medical records last year. They informed him that his discharge physical would be part of his Service Medical Records, which he had to request from the National Record Center. He submitted a request to the National Record Center last Spring and recieved a reply that they do not have the records as the records are in the possession of the VA. So he sent a request for a copy to the VA. If the discharge physical is part of his Service Medical Records - and his Service Medical Records are in the possession of the VA, it has been somewhat difficult for him to submit the discharge physical to you, as he has been unable to get a copy of it from you. The discharge physical must have been in his C-file at one point because a couple of the C&P exams make specific references to something that was said in his discharge physical. My husband recieved his post service medical care from the Military Treatment Center at xxx AFB, not from the VA. So it would seem that the only way the VA C&P physicians would have access to his discharge physical to discuss it in their exams would be if a copy of it would have been in his C-file. And as the discharge physical is part of my husband's Service Medical Records - which are all supposed to be in the possession of the VA because the VA became the keeper of those records once my husband filed his VA claim, I fail to understand how it was my husband's responsibility to send his discharge physical to the VA in order for them to have it in his file. I did not have time to go through the entire C-file at the time of my appointment.xxx, who assisted me in viewing the file, showed me where the discharge physical SHOULD have been located in his file. However,it was not in the file where it should have been. Again, the SMRS were not in any particular order in the file. They all appeared to be together, but they were not in any chronological order, some were upside down, some rightside up, etc. which made trying to find something take longer - and I only had one hour to view the file. xx even checked his dental record file to see if his discharge physical had accidentally been put with them. It is my understanding that the Separation Discharge Physical my husband recieved upon his retirement from the Air Force would have been part of his Service Medical Records. It is my understanding that the VA has in its possession all my husband's official Service Medical Records, which means we are now unable to get them from another source as the Va has the original documents. It is my belief that the VA C&P examiners would have had to have read his discharge physical in order to reference it in their reports. I find the fact that my husband's discharge physical cannot be located, and nothing can be done about it pretty disturbing. Thank you, xxxx Ms xxx: We have responded to your inquiry. We have reviewed the claims folder. There is no other information at this time that we can give you. You have reveiwed the claims folder as you requested. The information you want was not there. There is nothing else we can tell you regarding the physical examination report that you want. We can send you a form as indicated and you can send off for the record from the military. Thank you for using our website. Sincerely yours, xxxx

http://www.disabilitysecrets.com/assistance.html

Tamara, I have read that a large portion of SSD claims are denied on the first level - and if they are denied at the first level --they are usually denied on the reconsideration. I read that the lower level adjudicators are often hesitiant to grant the claims because they review claims for "accuracy" - and if the claim was denied and should have been granted - the adjudicator doesn't get in trouble. But if the claim was granted and should have been denied - then they adjudicator DOES get in trouble. So they would rather error on the side of covering their backsides. Not sure if that is true - it is just what I read. A hearing isn't really a "bad" thing -- it takes you up to the level where someone should actually consider the evidence. You can either be present for the hearing or ask that the evidence be considered without you present. You can get a lawyer --but one is not required. The lawyer will get a portion of your back pay. It would depend on how certain you feel about your case. If you feel uncertain - I would get a lwayer now --and try to win on this level. If you feel pretty certain - you can do it on your own -- and if you win - you keep it all. But if you don't win - you would most likely need a lawyer for the NEXT level -- and they would still get a chunk of ALL your back pay. When you request a hearing - they tell you that you have 10 days to submit evidence. But you can send more if you can show good cause for the delay. I read that before the hearing -- someone will actually go through the claim file and sometimes they grant the claim THEN - and it doesn't have to go to the ALJ. Also - on the part about filing because of misinformation - if you were misinformed by someone at Social Security -- you can request that your claim date be backdated to the date they misinformed you. You might want to see if you can talk to the person who denied your claim - and find out their actual reasoning - and address that in your appeal. If you call to ask questions about your letter -- they can try to give you the run around -- but sometimes they will direct you to the person who actually denied your claim -- so THEY can explain it to you. Then you can address that in your appeal. (They said they put that because ___, however, ____) But I don't see an SSD hearing as a bad thing. It is a chance for you to finally get your claim heard.

I remember reading about that -(I think - did you post it before - or is there a whole bunch of widows going through the same thing on had it right now?) I saw where you said the DIC was awarded. I am beginning to think the Month of Death Payments often just get lost in the shuffle. Here is their guidelines for processing such claims: Veterans Benefits Administration M21-1, Part IV Department of Veterans Affairs Change 216 Erratum Washington, DC 20420 April 26, 2005 Veterans Benefits Manual M21-1, Part IV, “Authorization Procedures,” is changed as follows: Pages 26-I-5 through 26-I-8: Remove these pages and substitute pages 26-I-5 through 26-I-8 attached. Paragraph 26.01j is modified to include two additional examples of cases requiring a determination as to a surviving spouse’s entitlement to a deceased veteran’s benefit or rate of payment for the month of death. Distribution: RPC: 2068 FD: EX: ASO and AR (included in RPC 2068) LOCAL REPRODUCTION AUTHORIZED April 26, 2005 M21-1, Part IV Change 216 Erratum month of death as a claim for this benefit. This includes a request over the phone or written notification. Authority 38 U.S.C. 5101. (a) Requests over the phone must be recorded on VA Form 119, “Report of Contact” and the caller must provide oral verification satisfactory to the veteran’s service representative that the caller is the surviving spouse. ( If there is any question as to the validity of the surviving spouse status, appropriate development should be undertaken. (a) If a request for the veteran’s rate for the month of death is accompanied by VA Form 21-534, “Application for Dependency and Indemnity Compensation, Death Pension, and Accrued Benefits,” a merit determination for death benefits will be made prior to awarding benefits under 38 CFR 3.20©. (2) Use a locally generated letter to send one of two possible messages, depending on whether TINQ (Treasury Inquiry) shows that the veteran’s check or direct deposit has been returned, either: (a) We will re-issue payment to you; or (B) Since you are entitled to the veteran’s payment for the month of death, you are not required to return the check or direct deposit. (3) In either instance, send the claims folder to Finance with the following notation on OF 41: “Surviving spouse entitled to 1-time payment of [amount of monthly compensation or pension received by the veteran at time of death] per 38 CFR 3.209©.” If payment has been returned, request Finance to re-issue the payment to the surviving spouse (06A transaction). If payment has not been returned, notify Finance that the overpayment should be removed (08E transaction). Input of the 08E transaction must be accomplished within 45 days of the debt being established. The finance activity must notify the Debt Management Center (DMC) of the action so that they can stop the reclamation process. If the debt has been in the system for 60 days, DMC cannot stop the reclamation process when the finance activity inputs the 08E transaction. Note: If a surviving spouse files a claim for Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) more than one year after the veteran’s death, or death pension more than 45 days after the veteran’s death and establishes entitlement, the claimant is still eligible for the veteran’s rate for the month of death under 38 CFR 3.20©. Note 2: Payment as described under 38 CFR 3.20© should not be confused with payment of the veteran’s rate for the month of death under 38 CFR 3.20(:D. Under 38 CFR 3.20(B), payment should be made to the surviving spouse for the month of death on the original death award (see 36.01(a)). (4) If, after payment under 38 CFR 3.20©, the surviving spouse subsequently becomes entitled to death benefits from the date of the veteran’s death at a rate higher than the amount paid under 38 CFR 3.20©, an offset should be established (38 CFR 3.20(B) and 3.31). Create the offset for recovery of the veteran’s rate for the month of death prior to the original award of DIC or death pension. (a) Withhold all benefits under Type 1 withholding from the date of entitlement. Suppress the award letter. After the award showing total withholding has been authorized, route the claims folder to Finance for action to establish the offset. Deliver these folders to Finance daily. (B) When the folder is returned from Finance, ensure the offset appears on the M01 screen. Process an amended award. Remove the withholding (show “0” entry under Type Withholding) and pay full benefits to which the surviving spouse is entitled. j. Four Types of Cases Requiring a Determination as to a Surviving Spouse’s Entitlement to a Deceased Veteran’s Benefit or Rate of Payment for the Month of Death. If the veteran was in receipt of benefits at the time of 26-I-5 M21-1, Part IV April 26, 2005 Change 216 Erratum death and a merit determination regarding the surviving spouse’s claim for improved death pension or Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) has been made, an additional determination must be made regarding the surviving spouse’s entitlement to the veteran’s benefit or rate of payment for the month of the veteran’s death. (1) A surviving spouse’s entitlement to death benefits has been established. The claim was received more than one year after the veteran’s death. The surviving spouse is entitled to the veteran’s benefit for the month of death under 38 CFR 3.20©. Send OF 41 to Finance (see 26.01i(3)). The provisions of § 3.20(B) do not apply, since the surviving spouse was not entitled to death benefits for the month of the veteran’s death. Therefore, a comparison between the veteran’s rate of payment at the time of death and the surviving spouse’s rate of DIC/death pension is unnecessary. (2) A surviving spouse’s entitlement to death benefits has been established. The claim was received within one year of the veteran’s death. The surviving spouse’s rate of payment is greater than the veteran’s rate for the month of death. Per 38 CFR 3.20(B), DIC may not be paid for the month in which the veteran died since the surviving spouse’s rate of DIC is greater. However, under the provisions of 38 CFR 3.20©, the surviving spouse is entitled to the benefit the veteran would have received that same month, but for his/her death. (3) A surviving spouse’s entitlement to death benefits has been established. The claim was received within one year of the veteran’s death. The surviving spouse’s rate of payment is less than the veteran’s rate for the month of the veteran’s death. The surviving spouse is entitled to the veteran’s rate for the month of death under 38 CFR 3.20(B). Payment for the month of death is included in the original award to the surviving spouse. (4) The surviving spouse’s entitlement to death benefits has been denied. The surviving spouse is entitled to the veteran’s benefit for the month of death under 38 CFR 3.20©(1). Send OF 41 to Finance (see 26.01i(3)).

That's an idea - but that would surprise me. I thought the PTSD claims are the ones they fight a lot. I bet they could save time if they stopped making combat vet prove they experienced a stressor. Free

Here is an idea. Maybe they could READ the claim when they get it. And if it seems reasonable grant it. Not automatically approving claims - just taking a little time to read the actual claim - and less time digging around in the file for something they can misconstrue. Less time sending people to doctors when they already have a medical opinion submitted. Less time sending out the "we are working on your claim" letters - and less time sending out SOCs semi-explaining why they didn't grant the claim. Going ahead and granting claims automatically - with the idea that they will take the money back if they end up not approving your claim is kind of scarey. It would help keep vets from starving while they wait though. But what would keep it from creating a backlog of claims that need to be processed so they can get their money back. It seems like it would shift the work around and create more work. And solve the problem of vets having no income - temporarily at least. But I am not sure it would solve the problem. I read once that an enormous number of VA claims are rated at 10%. So they would just send people their $100 checks and then freeze their bank accounts later. Free

Berta -and Pete too... I meant to get back to both of you about posts on another thread a couple of weeks ago...but got involved taking care of business and didn't get back to you. But it was a post where we were discussing people asking questions that had already been answered (not so much that the question had been answered at SOME point - but that THEIR specific question THEY had asked had been answered - and the question was re-asked as if it had not been). I know sometimes it takes awhile to get used to the Board -- and that might occur if the person doesn't know how to find their original post. Or -since the threads sometimes change course, someone might ask something that was currently being discussed in detail in a thread that they haven;t read. And Pete had made a remark about HIS pet peeve in group. However, I did want to get back to you and Pete...as you had both indicated that you wish you hadn't even mentioned what bothered you - as some of us checked to see if it was meant at us personally. I don't think either of you needed to apologize. I did ask if I was the widow you had mentioned because I wanted to know. And I did consider if I had been "guilty" of Pete's pet peeve. However, that is not a "bad" thing. Both your and Pete's complaints were valid. By expressing them - you gae us the opportunity to consider them - and consider if we were posting in a way that aggravated other members. I do not do forums a lot. I am sure I do things that might aggravate people who are "old hats" at the forums. So -- it was an oppotunity for me to learn. To think. Yes. I can see how doing that might bother people. I never considered that before. Do I do that? How can I take responsibility for MY actions on the group so I can post in a way that "works" for the group. I think this is preferred to other options - such as for no one to ever mention it - so we just go posting away in total ignorance that our posts are out of line for what works for the group. Or for us to NOT take any responsibility for our own actions in the group --and just figure that everyone should put up with whatever we do, instead of seeing our role in the group as just that - PART OF A GROUP - which means working together. Berta -- Yes. I can see how you might hit burn out meltdown sometimes. Because you not only sure information - you put your HEART AND SOUL and 158% of your energy and your SELF into helping others. So it is not just that you feel -- Dang.. I just spent my TIME writing that - You had just poured your entire heart and soul into trying to help someone. And if they didn't GET that help - yes..that would be frustrating as heck. And Pete - I value you wisdom and support. Not just for me - but for everyone in the group. So if something does bother you -- I think it is FINE that you tell us. If I am doing something that bothers someone - I would rather know - so I would have the opportunity to say "Oops.. Yep. I can see how that might bug someone. I never thought of that before. Now I know how to change that." Keep in mind I also have the option to say "Man - Pete sure is grouchy today." or to ignore your post - or whatever else. So - I certainly don't think there is a need to apologize for ANYTHING you have said. Those of us who responded where mostly exploring the idea of --Hmmm Have I DONE that? If I have -- here is why - but meaybe there is a better way to do it now that I know. I don't think that challenging us to explore how we can be more effective as part of the group is a "bad" thing at all. Free:)

Hey! Congrats on getting them to move on the claim that quickly! The month of death payment seems so tangled up and more confusing than it needs to be. The widow can get it IF she is not entitled to DIC or pension FOR THAT MONTH. But if DIC isn't granted until the MONTH AFTER the death -- then the widow would, byt their very rules NOT get DIC for the month OF death. So it seems like - as far as DIC is concerned - it should be simple. The widow gets the Vets check for the MONTH of DEATH, as she is not entitled to DIC for the MONTH OF Death. There is NO REASON to hold it up - wait for the ruling on the DIC claim, etc. If they know that DIC won't cover the MONTH of DEATH even if it is granted. If the widow doesn't get DIC -- she is also entitled to the Month of Death payment of the Vet. I am not sure about how it plays with the Pension. I haven;t checked it out much because it doesn't affect me (I am not eligible for Pension). The vets organizations recommend sending a letter in stating that the widow is not eligible for pension (for whatever reason they aren't --to much income, resources, etc) and therefore you are requesting the month of death check be granted to her. The rules I read in regard to DIC pretty much said IF the widow applied for the Month of Death check ALONE -- they send it. IF she applied for DIC and / or Pension at the SAME time she applies for the month of death check - then she won't be granted the Month of Death payment due the Vet until the decision on DIC or Pension is made. But if a widow isn't eligible for DIC until the Month AFTER death - I don't understand why they would need to take so long to decide if she is entitled to the month of death check. Has it ever occured to them that the widow might need the funds at the TIME - not a year down the road? I am sure it has. The VA still has a hold on my husband's Month of Death payment in my bank account. First I was told they couldn't release the funds because there was no evidence in the file that I was the widow. I RESENT the info to them -for the THIRD time -- When I was at the VA last week - it had a note in the file that I WAS entitled to the payment for the month of death as his widow. However, they still have not taken the funds from my bank account OR released the hold on them. They just sit there - unavailable to me. (I consider them to be TAKEN when they became unavailable to me - regardless of whether they are still sitting in my bank account). Anyway. I sent the VA an IRIS - and told them as it was noted in my husband's file that I was ENTITLED to the month of death payment that I would like them to either: 1. Release the hold on my funds in my bank account - or 2. Reclaim the funds and send me a check for the amount. The IRIS reply told me that they could not do either until a decision is made on my DIC claim. Ack! Free

Josephine, Those seem to be very supportive of your claim. Most general doctors can and do make referrals. With you doctor being that supportive of your claim, is there someone who he can refer you to - a psychiatrist / psycologist that will do some testing and write an opinion? Someone who won't sell you out. It would be especially strong if a psychiatrist / psyhchologist could write that they reviewed your history, and even the unfavorable exams -- and did this that and the other test - and declares that you do NOT have a personality disorder - but that you do have ____, which seems to have began in the service. Another option to get an opinion would be to check out some couseling services that are specific to WOMEN. Especially some that provide victim services. They might be able to refer you to someone that understands the dynamics of "victimology" and can therefore use THAT expertise in their opinion. Often, when women have been victimized - they exhibits symptoms that lots of people will blow off as "insignificant" or try to attribute to "personality flaws" of the person - rather than see them as SYMPTOMS OF the victimization. For instance, young girls who have been sexually abused often start acting out sexually. Instead of seeing this as a SYMPTOM of sexual abuse, people will see it as the REASON she was sexually abused. So when you have a young girl that enter the service that is presumed mentally sound - who gets grabbed by the neck and is so scared that she peed her pants -- that starts showing signs of chronic anxiety AFTER that -- you kind of have to wonder how people can try to explain it away as a "personality disorder." Unfortunately - the more you try to convince them that it isn't a personality disorder - the more they start becoming convinced that it is one. So you don't want the VA thinking 'Man - this lady acts nuts. The VA doc must be right." You want to find someone who can give you the right weapons to fight the battle with. I was even wondering about some of the "second opinion" websites - that offer second medical opinions -- and drug recommendations. I am not sure how helpful they might be. Here is a link to an online psychological service that has an online psychiatrist. http://www.etherapistsonline.com/ Free

Is that the diagnosis they gave you? What report did you get from your treating physician? Did they write an opinion for you that discredited the VA opinion? I am usure why ___reported ___ as in my ___ years of treating the patient - that was never a problem. And again, if you can get another doctor to back your favorable reports and discredit the unfavorable one - it should really help. I would also wonder about the other people present during the eval. Did they also write reports? Did they all sign off on the report? Free

Also - if the doctor won't give a medical opnion -- getting a copy of their notes can really help. Because they might have mentioned it in their notes. Even that would help. I have seen some BVA decisions that consider information documented in the doctors notes to be very credible and have even stated that they considered them probative BECAUSE they were not documented with the purpose of getting the vet benefits. This doesn't mean they can ignore IMOs becaue they were given to get the vet benefits. But it does mean that if the doctor documents something in their notes -- without explaining it in detail -- you can submit the notes and back it with medical evidence. If an IMO just says that lung cancer can cause strokes -- they need to back it with reasons for giving such a decision. But if the doctor puts in his notes "stroke most likely a complication of patient's lung cancer" the VA wouldn't have expected him to write out all the rationale in detail...not in the doctors notes. But you CAN submit that type of evidence. Submit medical journal info to show that the documentation in the doctors notes are based on sound medical principles - and ask the VA to accept the opinion - indicating the doctor would not have included it in the doctor notes if that was NOT their opinion --and as the doctor documented it without regard to any application for benefits - its credibility should not be in question. Free

Josephine, The doctors report should differentiate between observable facts and reports from others. To state that was you say was your report - and to state other things as if they were a fact - could be called into question..unless they actualy saw you kick the wall, throw food, etc. then they should note who reported it rather than state it as a fact. However, consider this as a fight against a spider. There are two kinds of webs in a spider web. The ones that go straight to the center are the non sticky webs - - The ones that go around are the sticky webs. THe spider runds up and down the straight webs --the non sticky ones. That is why the spider never gets caught in its own web. It knows which ones to stay on. But the spider counts on others getting off onto the side webs - the sticky ones - and getting caught. Kind of how Hoppy talks about how they often don't give you the real resons on the SOC. They can pull you into the sticky webs getting you to argue about points that even if you prove your point have nothing to do with proving your case. So the best thing to do is to pay attention to which webs are the nonsticky ones and which ones are the sticky ones. Which ones are the side arguments that if you go over to the side you get caught in the sticky web. Try to focus on the nonticky ones. The ones that go straight to the heart of the issue. One thing to keep in mind is that their evaluation can actually help you - if you play your cards right. Many vets have so much problem proving that they actually suffer from a psychological illness. That can be SO hard to prove if one doctor says you do suffer from one and one docotr says you don't. However, even THEIR doctors say you have the psych problems -- and they even date it all the way back to the military. The issue is that they are calling it something different.They are calling it a personality disorder instead of an aquired psychological illness. So the record clearly shows there IS a problem. The record clearly shows that it dates back to your military service. You have got that one covered. The issue is what to call it. So getting opinions from doctors that focus on what to CALL it is the most important part of the battle. You already have some reports from the VA from the other C&Ps that support your claim. The VA is considering the report that is against your claim as more probative. But if you add more opinions that SUPPORT your claim, especially if someone will actually point out why the one agaisnt your claim is mistaken -- the weight will have to shift - unless they get more evals that are agaisnt your claim. If all the reports support your claim but one - it gets harder and harder to deny your claim based on that one report. They can keep your arguing forever about exactly what the doctor said in his report and why that was wrong -- but that just keeps you stuck in the sticky webs. Get back on the nonsticky web. Ask - what do I need to prove my claim - and go after it. It is probably more opinions that support your claim - and if you can get one that where a doctor specifically addresses the unfavorable report - and shows how that is not a valid conclusion...it would be hard for them to keep denying you. I am not saying that the doctor who wrote the unfavorable report was not wrong for what he did / said. I am saying that if they can keep you focused on that -- they can keep you caught in the sticky webs. Free

Soft tissue injuries used to be this way also, until they developed technology that was able to objectively detect them. People complained of back problems -- the x-rays were "fine" - so presto! No back problem! The person was "faking it." Or the doctor who believed the patient had no objective "proof." Problems that medical science has no way to objectively detect are prone to these problems. However, I think for every person that WAS faking it - there were MANY more people that actually DID have the pain that was not accepted or acknowledged by the doctors. I think the same is true for psychological problems. Some people fake it. But many more are not given appropriate diagnosis or treatment because they are not listened to - or the doctor fits the self reports into the picture he / she has already created of the person. Or people don't respect psychological pain as REAL pain, though it is very real and can often be equally (if not more) devestating than physical pain. I think self reports ARE valid and should be taken as such. How many times do you hear of someone who kept explaining their symptoms to a doctor - and the doctor finds nothing wrong - later the illness is detected --which validates the person's self report. Unfortunately - with mental pain - the person often never does recieve the medical finding that verifies and validates the very real pain that they feel but no one can see. Free

Good idea Pete. His C-file is four folders full. But, yes, I think - especially considering the fact that we have requested the discharge physical SPECIFICALLY several times for over a year, and I drove a 10 hour round trip to be able to at least see it and read it - the fact that neither the VA person nor I could even FIND it in the file is a problem. So maybe I can request that they put the file in order, and give me another appointment to view it - and also send me a copy of the discharge physical as soon as possibe. Free

Some good points. I was thinking we used the FOIA form when we requested the file last year. We just kept getting form letters every so often (responses) that told us that they were working on it - and that they fill the resquests in the order they are recieved. Yep. Even with a letter from a congressman and a senator asking the VA to speed up the claim process because of my husband's terminal illness - they couldn't even send him a copy of his discharge physical until it was his turn. I think it has to do with the idea that they really don't see the vet getting copies of their files as having anything to do with the claim. They think THEY look through the files - and whether the vet has access to them has nothing to do with the granting of the claim. Free

Hey! Welcome aboard! When I asked for an appointment they told me it would be much better if they just sent me the file - since I was so far away. But we had already waited 7 months for the file...or at least the discharge physical. And when my husband died they told me they were sending the files anyway and that I would get them in 30 days. Over 30 days later they had NOT sent the files - then I was informed that I had to fill out a NEW request - as they could no longer honor my husband's request. And that it would take AT LEAST six months to get the file, any copies, OR an appointment. I sent in another request asking for: 1. The complaint C-file. 2. Since it would take over 6 months to recieve that - and since my husband had requested the C-file, and in the very least, a copy of his disharge physical MORE than 6 months before he died, that they would expedite the request for the Discharge Physical and send that as quickly as possible. 3. An appointment to see his C-file. I actually found Chicago - in general (as a City) very nice. I live near St. louis. I was going to take the metra train in from Joilet. Couldn't find the dang train station in Joliet (how a city can hide a train station - I will never know) I drove to downtoan chicago and had no trouble finding the VA at all. Free They gave me an appointment in less than 6 months though.

I went to the Chicago RO yesterday for my appointment to see my husband's C-file. The letter I got said to bring a photo ID. The first thing the lady at the desk asked me was "Did you bring the letter?" No. Was I supposed the bring the letter? I have AN APPOINTMENT. Yes. In order to see the file you HAVE to bring the letter. That's the only way we will know that YOU are the person we said can SEE the file. (with that "how STUPID can you be" tone of voice) I pointed out the letter did not indicate that I had to bring it. I had assumed that the PHOTO ID would "prove" I was the person that was entitled to see the file. I drove 5 HOURS ONE WAY to see the file. I did not appreciate the power game upon my arrival. But she decided that, despite my stupidity in not bringing the letter I should have KNOWN to bring because how else would they know who I am without the letter, that she would "check" and see if the powers that be would ALLOW me to see the file without the LETTER. Grrrr... Then some young girl stumbles out of the office with the C-file - announcing that I don't have to worry - that SHE has a copy of the needed letter that will allow me to see the C-file. Geez - they believe their own power games. She announced that I would have exactly one hour to the minute to view the file -- but did let me look through it on my own in her presence. At first she only had one thin file. I told her that WE had more records than that. So she went back and looked and found out that there were four files total. She said I could sticky note anything I wanted copies of - and they would "follow up" on them. But I couldn't find his discharge physical. We have been asking for over a year for that. We have requested a copy of his C-file -- and made what is called a "limited request" for the discharge physical - because sometimes if a request for files takes a long time - agencies can fill a limited request quicker. I drove five hours - thinking I will FINALLY get to at least SEE his discharge physical - and read what it says. I couldn't find it. She said it would be in the front- and then she said it would be in the back _ actually all his SMRS were out of order. 1996, 1982, 1995, 1971 notes just kind of in there. We couldn't find any record beyond 1996, though he retired in 1998. She looked through the dental record to see if it might have been stuck in there by accident. She told me maybe the Air Force didn't give it to them. But a couple of his C&P exams MENTION it in THEIR reports. I think I will send an IRIS and ask them to locate it and send me a copy. I did find out the case is set for "review" on September 19. She said to try to have everything to them by then. But she said if I get it in earlier - and let them know it is all in - they will send the file on sooner. Free

Josephine, I can't find it at the moment - but you made a remark that the doctor said you DENIED being a cutter. Sometimes with psych diagnosis that can be interpreted as "they are - but they deny it." However, I am amazed in looking at my husband's medical records how often doctors report that such and such was denied - though the doctor never asked. Patient denies headaches. Patient denies fatigue. Patient denies pain. Denied?? The doctor didn't ask. So "denies" can mean - the patient did not walk in here screaming in pain and insisting that I did something about it. If the patient didn't mention it - or if the patient mentions it and the doctor doesn't listen -I think they write patient DENIES -so they have covered themselves where it looks like they assessed it. I recently looked at my husband's hospital records from his alst illness. He was FULL CODE. He insisted on remaining full code until almost the end (meaning they would so EVERYTHING to try to save his life). Everyone kept trying to talk him out of being "code" Everyone kept trying to tell him he was delaying the inevitable. But still - he insisted on actively FIGHTING FOR HIS LIFE!! The psych report states 'Patient denies any suicidal tendencis...." Duh..... Free

Good point. I don't think a Bachelor's would carry much weight for diagnosis. But with the Bachelor's - if I was actually working with the vet in some way - it could carry SOME weight if I reported objective observations. Or if it was within my job speciality. For instance, I worked at a shelter for battered women for several years. In that case - though I have a BAchelor's - a report that Client Z consitently distributed ___ behaviors in my presence and / or Client Z reported that the behavior of her husband reminded her of how ___ treated her while she was in the service - that might carry some weight. I was reading an article recently about the number of women in the military that are subject to abuse by fellow soldiers - and how they have to travel in pairs for their own safety - and how they are afraid to report it because THEY will be the one who is treated like an outcast. Really sad. Free

I think one of the problems that can occur in diagnosing psychiatric disorders is that they are much more subjective and easier for someone to see what they are looking for. The "evidence" is different. And the lines are more "fuzzy." My husband had cancer. No one could see the cancer unless it was there. But with psychiatric you can have PTSD and the clinician can SEE personality disorder and give "solid" reasoning for it - if that is what they WANT to see. Because a lot of the psychiatric disorders have the same types of manifestations -- so the objective evidence is the way it manifests. The subjective part is what they decide to attribute the manifestations to. That can create a problem. Actually, as with my husband - he claimed fatigue -- under the dessert storm. The doctor tested him and decided his fatigue was "caused" by his mild depression. My husband never complained of being depressed. He complained of being fatigued. He was never treated for depression. He was never refered to get checked for his depression by any of his treating physicians. His doctors repeatedly documented how he was always in "good spirits," "cheerful" etc. But yet the VA examiner - when doing the workup for fatigue - took the fact that he checked a certain number of boxes on the dperession inventory and that meant he was depressed. Guess what boxes he checked that "triggered" the depression diagnosis? I don't have much energy. I have trouble getting things done. I don't feel like going out much. ALL the "triggers" on the depression inventory where about how TIRED he was. But yet, he was given a "depression" diagnosis because the diagnosis was triggered by the number of boxes checked. What kind of circular reasoning is that? What is your problem? I am tired. Okay - take this test. On the test - mark that you are tired. Oh.. you aren't tired. You are depressed. Because you checked the boxes on this form that said you are tired. And this measures depression. Therefore if you are tired on THIS test - you are depressed - and your fatigue is CAUSED by depression. I can't see how a valid diagnosis could be made that depression is CAUSING your fatigue without OTHER indicators of depression BESIDES fatigue. I don't think this is just the VA. I think it happens all the time in psychological / psychiatric diagnosis. They can see what they are looking for - and confirm it with their testing. And I don't think the VA doc was "out to get" my husband. I think he actually thought he had "accurately" diagnosed him. We have asked the VA to go back and reconsider this diagnosis - as ONE part of my husband's claim -- to reconsider the evidence in the light of new knowledge for diseases diagnosed after the presumptive period - to see if they were earlier manifestations of the disease that "gain new understanding in light of the new evidence" In other words - fatigue is one of the first SYMPTOMS of many types of cancer. My husband consistently reported he was fatigued. Though the VA gave him a diagnosis of "depression" as the "cause" of his fatigue - the ONLY symptoms that triggered the depression diagnosis were the symptoms of his FATIGUE (no other indicators were triggered) So we have asked them to reconsider that it as likely as not that his reported fatigue could be just as easily attributed to the cancer that was subsequently found - as it could to "depression." I am not expecting the RO to do much with the info. But we still included it. However, I have seen quite a few BVA cases where they have made similar decisions in cancer cases -- where cancer was detected shortly after the presumptive period - and the evidence shows that due to growth rates of that kind of cancer - it was probably incurred while in the service. But often, instead of stretching all the way back to prior to discharge - the BVA will take some of the symptomology that the vet reported during their presumptive period - and decide that it is as likely as not that the symptomology reported in that time frame could be related to the cancer - and grant SC on that. Free

I noticed this also in researching BVA decisions. How many claims with no merit at all reach the BVA from "widows" who weren't even widows. Alot of times the BVA doesn't spend much time with these - going into all the law - they often dismiss the claim as having no merit. But they still tie up the system - and often times the RO has had to spend quite a bit of time investigating the claim...interviewing people, checking records, etc. Actually, it is too bad that every vet can't be afforded the time and attention from the RO that many bogus widow claims do. There also seems to be a lot of appeals from widows that get pension that don't turn in income, or report when their dependents move out, and then get benefits cut when the VA finds out - that appeal the decisions. Free

I have a Bachelor's in Psychology. Can I write an opinion? lol To me Psychiatrists focus more on "medical" treatment of the problem and prescribe medicine - Where Psychologists lean more toward other therapeutic approaches --talk therapy, behavioral etc. --and often work in tandem. However, it has been my experience that Psychologist do most of the psychological testing. When my son was being evaluated in the hospital - the psychiatrist ordered psychological testing - and then went by thier reports. And a lot of the Community Counseling centers have a Psychiatrist that prescribes meds and sign off on everything. As far as the IMO's go - they do not have to include an actual exam but can be based on a review of the records. I have seen quite a few times the BVA requested an IMO - if they needed a medical opinion -- or if there was a lot of conflicting evidence in the file. Free