Ricky

Wait until you get the AFO. Nod the original decision with the new evidence to include a statement from the Doc that provided the ankle/foot was so bad. Ask for a rating on the foot of loss of use. Looks like you may have the evidence to support such a rating.

I would assume KKP is not geting benefits for this child. VA regulations provide that the child must be natural, step or adopted. Legal wards based upon a court does not get dependent status at the VA. I have one who is 11 yo. the court awarded custody to me and my wife when she was two and she has lived with us since then. My claim for dependency for her was denied because I had not adopted her and they explained that award of custody by a court does not meet the requirements of the VA for establishment of dependency. KKP - My opinion is that you should act quickly. I do not think you could adopt someone who is over 18. I am not a legal specialist so you need to check with an attorney in your state as to the state's requirements for adoption. The process is normally a long one and keep in mind that the VA will only consider the date on the final adoption order and not the date it was began! If I am wrong and you have received dependency status for a grandchild in which you have custody of please provide the details on how you did this. It would be important to me, plus I have seen this same issue discussed on other boards as it seems there are a lot of ole grandpa veterans out here that are now raising their grandchildren. Thanks

This can happen many times. The VA has the authority to order a C&P at any time to insure the veterans disability meets certain levels required for a rating. About the only way to stop this is to have your additional IMO's attack the VA evidence directly - This does two things in that it provides a basis for you argument agains the short lived examination by, more than likely, a unqualified examiner and it makes the new IMO's new and material requiring that it be weighed, probated and discussed in the rating.

This happens a lot and leaves the veteran in limbo on mars. One of my last ratings read: Evidence of the record indicates that the claim MEETS the requirements for an increased disabiltiy, therefore, the request is denied, specifically due to no evidence of a recent or active disease. It ain't easy to correct - they force me into a NOD -after 10 mos of waiting on a response about the wording in the rating, I had to act. The FUNNY THING IS, it was denied again. The SOC gave the same reasons above WORD FOR WORD, hahahahahahahahaha. When I brought this up at a hearing the hearing officer, shook her head and said "Mr. H I read the SOC response during our break, and I FULLY understand your position and I have no ideal what HE was doing. He said it meets the requirements, which it does, then he denied the claim. We will get it fixed. Maybe she will. When she issues the SSOC hopefully she will not forget to use cut and paste operation without proofing her final.

No shame in it Windy - crap happens and it seems to happen to disabled guys a lot. I found that viagra works better but some of my other meds tend to argue with the viagra and as said below - NO HAT HANGER. My other problem is I just don't wanna get nasty any more. Its like a lost instinct. I know I should have it but it just aint there. Its pure h e double l when you just lose interest and no matter what you try, you had just as soon be out mowing the lawn. However, once every six months or so the urge hits you, you act quick and grab the ole viagra and your other meds fight it and keep it at the 1/4 level---------talk about being ashamed. Although most don't give it much thought, I consider it to be one of my worse disabilities and you can not even get a disability evaluation rating for it. 89.00 per month is all you get for giving up your manhood! I would give them back all disability payments they give me if I could only get my manhood back.

Angela - Six is dead on with this issue. The facts are: -M21 was pretty specific on how to evaluate the evidence and how the reasons and bases was to be written. That has been superceeded by the new M21-R. M21-R is very gernic and give no specific guidance. It simply says you should weigh the evidence to determine if it is probative and if it is use it in the rating decision. -The court says: (in summary) the reasons and bases will discuss all probative evidence,.........in a way which will allow the appealant to appeal and the court to make a ruling (remember this is my summary do a search on reasons and bases at the courts site). My opinion is: -If you get a generic rating that does not discuss you evidence then you MUST first attack the issue and establish that your evidence you submitted was probative to your claim. I did this by arguing that all of my medical evidence was---a discussion specifically on my medical conditions in which I sought a disability rating; It was from my TREATING doctors, one a neurologist with over 35 years experience, one my PCP who had treated me for over 17 years and two VA examiners at the VA C&P. This showed and I think the board and court would agree that the evidence was specific to the claims at hand and both doctors had provided personal care for my conditions for a number of years. It was NOT evidence that I had obtained from a foot doctor or GP who had never seen me except for the one time which they based their opinion on. Now I am not saying that a veteran who obtains a medical opinion from someone other than their treating doctors is not doing the right thing but my arguments definitely focused the evidence on my claim and left them with no way to say that it was not probative. This will/should cause one of two things: -They reference the evidence in the rating as a basis for the granting of your claim. -or the reference it because they did not consider it probative or they use other medical evidence to out weigh yours in a denial. In the later this at least provides you with what you face as you climb the hill and is the fair thing to do. However, as Six said they seldom if at any time do this. However, if you have a statement with arguments on the probativeness of your evidence you stand a very good chance at the BVA. Sorry to be so long but I think this is what you are looking for.

Sherry, I am a little older than you are and I understand the pain situation cause I live with pain on the left side of the body due to my stroke, 24 hours per day. However, I kinda feel that the doc is right. If we don't force these old bodies to move out then they kinda forget how. When we get into a situation, such as disabled, we seem to become complaced with our situation and once again the muscles in the body just give up. I can not feel my foot but it hurts as though someone is ripping the flesh from the bone. This feeling is increased bunches with simple touch. however, in an effort not to give up walking I accepted the ideal of having a special made AFO which would allow me to feel the foot when it hits the ground plus it keeps my ankle from breaking. Although it increases my pain I force myself to move on cause I am afraid if I give up then my life will change forever. I guess what I am trying to say is that your doc seems to have your over all physical well being in her concerns and does not want you to give up one of your most valuable assets - the ability to walk- without a fight. Hang in there and if you really need one I am sure it will come your way.

Thanks Pete. Yep the doc is a little worried also. Since my stroke he has been unable to give me anything that will work. Diet is in check and take meds without fail but it just hangs there. My concern is that since I have alread had one stroke I don't want to be one of the stats that says people who suffer a stroke are 80 percent likely to have another one within the next five years and that one will be devestating.

Pete, you are right about the proof being in the resulting rating! So I guess I will see. She said it should take about 3 weeks to clear up all of the problems. I do have a question for the board - one of my claims was an increase for hypertension which is currently rated at 20 percent. At the time of the claim my BP was almost constant at 245/136 which is why I had the stroke so I requested that the rating be increased. At this time, 2 years later, it averages 210/120. I am afraid that they are going to want a C&P to verify my original claim. If so the current readings will only qualify for a 20 percent rating (take three different meds per day). So my question is - should I with draw my request for an increase? If I let it stand it will probably cost me several months more waiting on the claim because of the C&P. If I withdraw it hopefully the rest of the claim will be rated without a C&P because of the previous C&P's and civilian medical evidence in the file. Bottom line is that the hypertension is already SC'ed so any future residuals will be secondary any way not matter what the rating percentage is. What do you guys think?

Berta is correct. What I did was take the SOC and developed an outline for me to follow. An outline is suffcient casue by the time you get to this point you will have in your head every word that has ever been uttered concerning you claim. I had all supporting evidence - tabbed, and one folder for my supporting regulations. All issues were numbered as was the supporting evidence. My wife, was able to take the evidence and regulation files and hand them to me as my discussion progressed. I started out with an opening statement thank the VA, VARO and the hearing officer. I then explained what my claim was (items being claimed) followed by the reminder that it was required by law that the VA assist me in developing my claim, therefore, I requested that she in carrying out this responsibility, provide me with any evidence she felt was needed to resolve the issues or to ask any clarifying questions that may prompt a response which would solve the problem. She was exteremly pleased with this opening statement for it let her know up front that my intentions at the hearing was to be professional and I had some type of understanding of the reg.

GW1 - what you have done is considered by all to be a GREAT win. This type of case has plaques GW vets since the 90's. Not to many people succeed in such a claim. Your strategy used to win will be invaluable to all GW vets. Way to go guy. Make sure you pass this on to every GW vet site out there.

My wife and I just returned from my DRO hearing. Although no decision was made the DRO appeared to be a very understanding person. She was pleseant, professional and most of all very knowledgeable of my claimed disabilities and the law and requlation. She allowed up all the time needed to submit our oral arguments, testimony and new evidence. She, on the record on several occassions agreed to the validity of our arguments and she asked what I felt to be very informative and claim supporting question. It was by far one of the most pleaseant and experiences I have had with the VA in the past seven years. I truly hope it goes my way but even if it does not I can at least say without hesitation that this hearing provided me with a different view/side of my VARO. However, on the negative side as we sat in the lobby waiting our turn we were able to observe the contact team people as they dealt with walk in veterans. They were some of the most disgruntled and mean people that I have every seen. Smart a$$ responses to questions, eyes rolling up in their heads and just the general felling that they truly hated dealing with veterans. The veterans that were walking in were both older and younger veterans with questions such as how do I file, what do I have to do to review my file, can I add this to my file etc.... They were all professional and respectful even though they were being treated like pieces of crap. Maybe just a bad day for the contact team. Anyway I will post the results, good or bad, when I get them. I guess I can now sit back in a low throttle and simply enjoy my visits to Hadit and helping other veterans. I thank all of you guys for helping me to get to this stage. I could not have done it without you and would probably simply given up years ago. Thanks

Spike Hoppy has given you some good advice. Just notes from reading your post: chronic = has existed more that 6 months My opinion is: Always remember - the most probale reason that most of the appealed claims get approved by the BVA is - the BVA adjuicater is a senior lawyer. He is supported by a staff of lawyers. They see things both legally and medically different than the GS9, non medical or legal trained, rater or the non medical or legal trained DRO/senior rater. When they look at a claim if it meets the legal requirements and the medical evidence from experts is there you are gonna get an approval. Most of the time the rater nor DRO understand the law are medical portion of the claims and their decisions are based upon their interpertations. Once it gets to the BVA you betcha you gonna get a fair shake if your claim has merrit cause they understand that if the claim is in accordance with the law and leaves no legal room for an argument then its gotta go into the approved stack. JMHO As a side note there are some smart and snappy raters and DRO's out there so not all is lost at the RO level :D

Looks great to me. I have IE7 and all seems to fit on to the screen. I do have a 24 inch monitor if that makes a difference.

Berta, during my time on Hadit I have followed your posts with great interest. My personal opinion is that you are one of the smartest when it comes to dealing with DRO's. The reason for my interest in your posts is that one of my claims is in the same bucket. I have received denials from the rater and the DRO based upon "no evidence exist" although I have provided several statements from my treating doctors. Although I have had to formally appeal this claim due to the time constraints, the RO has agreed to have a DRO meeting with me this Monday. I posted my arguments outline in my post "upcoming DRO hearing" and would appreciate it if you would take a look at it and provide any comments you feel necessary. After I received the SOC in this claim which was word for word with the rating decision, I submitted three additional statements: one from my employeer, and two from treating doctors concerning the time of occurance of my stroke. Should I have not received a SSOC? I really do not know why they denied the claim for there was no additional information in the reason and bases of the rating or the SOC so my attacks are on the "no evidence exist" statement. Kinda of hard to fight such an issue when you know that you have submitted several pieces of medical evidence in support of the claim. I did not post in my previous post my argument for an invalid SOC but I will also present that during the hearing (it will be my first argument since it affects all of the issues in my claim). I have taken your advice and purchased some colored paper (hot pink). I will copy the medical opinions and statements that I have submitted and take them to the hearing with me. I spoke to all three of my doctors and asked for their help again. They are willing but the over all feeling is "jez I have written 4 statements already, I can not see any other way to say that you had a stroke in Jan 05 and no evidence exist to indicate that your current neurological deficits are associated to any previous stroke cause there has never been a previous stroke". The are great doctors and are providing me with another piece of paper. It will reference their previous statements/opinions and rationals for that opinion. Anyway, I know you are busy but if you could look at my attachment in my previous post and provide any guidance you feel necessary me and my family would greatly appreciate it. Thank you for your kindness and time and effort spent helping veterans. Ricky

Thanks Tbird. The link is good, however, for some reason I have been unable to access the GPO site for days. Even just trying to get CFR 38 I can not get there. It just sits there and blinks at me until it times out. I think that what you are doing with this addition will be invaluable to veterans trying to file claims. Ricky

Great!! At least the ones I read through. Where is this rating schedule at. I could not find such a link in the below. Now keep in mind that I am old and half blind.

thanks for the comments guys. I do not have a rep. I attempted early on to get one. When I had a 30 percent rating the state reps told me "thats what wrong with the system - people are greedy - you should be happy with the 30 percent" so I went to one of the big three. The rep for this area was drunk (no crap) at the first meeting so I tried one of the other two. I made 12 phone calls to the orgination without any return calls so I said the hell with this and went it on my own. As of today I do not see any difference in the treatment of my claim than those of my buddies who are and have used the VSO's here. This will be a formal hearing. I assure you that nothing will happen as a result and it is being conducted due to my continued pressure on them. I asked for a De Novo review with hearing back in Aug 05. The review was completed in 5 months and the hearing was not offered or conducted. That made me peed so I set out on a mission to make them comply with the regs. Two of my issues are in the NOD stage and 7 of them have already been perfected on a VA 9 cause of the time requirements of the system. However, I was determined to have my hearing. All I ask is that the VARO follow the rules just as I have to do. Since I do not have a rep do you think there will be any time alotted for me to discuss issues with the DRO informally? I hope so. Once again thanks PS do you guys think the notes flow in a logical manner?

This is the official VA take on the issue: 3.302 Service connection for mental unsoundness in suicide. top (a) General. (1) In order for suicide to constitute willful misconduct, the act of self-destruction must be intentional. (2) A person of unsound mind is incapable of forming an intent (mens rea, or guilty mind, which is an essential element of crime or willful misconduct). (3) It is a constant requirement for favorable action that the precipitating mental unsoundness be service connected. (:D Evidence of mental condition. (1) Whether a person, at the time of suicide, was so unsound mentally that he or she did not realize the consequence of such an act, or was unable to resist such impulse is a question to be determined in each individual case, based on all available lay and medical evidence pertaining to his or her mental condition at the time of suicide. (2) The act of suicide or a bona fide attempt is considered to be evidence of mental unsoundness. Therefore, where no reasonable adequate motive for suicide is shown by the evidence, the act will be considered to have resulted from mental unsoundness. (3) A reasonable adequate motive for suicide may be established by affirmative evidence showing circumstances which could lead a rational person to self-destruction. © Evaluation of evidence. (1) Affirmative evidence is necessary to justify reversal of service department findings of mental unsoundness where Department of Veterans Affairs criteria do not otherwise warrant contrary findings. (2) In all instances any reasonable doubt should be resolved favorably to support a finding of service connection (see §3.102).

50+30 = 65 rounded to 70.

Please note - the hearing notes are just that notes. They will not be read word for word. They are kinda detailed for notes but I did not want to forget anything. I have no problem presenting them orally without even looking at the paper. At least that is what I think now - just wait until I get there the ole mind will probably go blank hahahahahaha. Nah I will be ok.

Betrayed this as with all disability claims would depend on the medical evidence. If the death report read suicide due to depression coupled with a statement from you treating pysc saying that in the last days you seemed more depressed and displayed suicidal tendices and then he/she added the ole at least as likely as not then I think it would be a service connected death JMHO - please don't take my opinion as advise and test the system ole boy. You scare the hell out of me by just asking such a question. Are you ok my buddy?????

cherie from the info you posted here it looks like you meet the requirements so I would file the claim soonest!

Rocky do you have the returned green receipts signed by the VA on or around the date you say you mailed the items? Although fighting through the system will be a headache and take its toll on you and your family you will prevail with such evidence in the end. When this has happened to me I simply have written another letter explaining that the item was mailed on such and such day and attach another copy of it along with a copy of the signed green return receipt. They have accept this as proof of the claim/item being submitted and I have not had any problems. Maybe I am just luck also but give it a try. At least it will give you another piece of paper to support your appeal at a later date if needed.

cloud provided excellent advise for all. When dealing with the VA it is the same as dealing with a military promotion board. We would all like to think that the VA really takes the time to review our claims so they know what we are saying or claiming. However, that does not happen nor will it ever happen. When your file gets into the hands of a rater the probability of it being simply scanned is very high. Your statements need to be clear, factual and to the point. Having said that we Hadit peoples will take all the time necessary to clarify your issues so that we understand. So do not worry, just take your time and provide the most acurrate post you can. Someone on here will understand you and provide you with the needed advise to your problems. We be a team!!!!!!!