mclevela726

Thank you all for your comments. I am approaching this from a continuity of care standpoint. I do not feel that I get the level of care at local VA that I get from my private care physician nor do I feel that I am being allowed to be a part of my care. For example, local VA doc has prescribed medication inappropriate for a diabetic, because it is known and well documented to cause a rise in blood sugar (My credentials include a degree in nutrition with an emphasis in dietetics as well as having been registered with the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics). As such, I have experienced a fasting blood sugar that has gone from around 126 mg/dL to over 300 mg/dL. And while I have asked to be changed to a medication from the same class and that is appropriate for a diabetic, VA doctor refuses to do so. As far as compensation, I am 100% T & P with the VA stating that "no other exams will be scheduled". I agree with the VA as a back-up plan. However, how might I approach this is a manner that I am not being double treated for the same thing without "burning bridges" with VA? Thanks again for your time.

Hello all, If I disenroll (cancel) from care at VA will my family lose CHAMPVA. I ask because I have private insurance (required by my employer to opt into) and I want to see a private doctor. Thanks. MCleve

Thank for saying this in particular!

PS the exam you quoted is how I got 40%!

Thank Vync. I hope you are too!

I know all too well. I'm going to start working on it. Thanks.

And for anyone wondering. Yes, I see a VSO in two weeks for this.

And now the Exam from 08/30/2012 VA used to award me 40% for low back and 40% for right/left leg radiculopathies

And now 2nd DBQ from December 2018

And now 1st DBQ from December 2018

Hello again, Please compare the following DBQs used by VA and tell me where VA may have seen "improvement" in both the lower back and bilateral radiculopathies. Thank you. Exam report from November 2017

The following is from the C&P exam where I was rated at 40% for each extremity

Thanks for the input!

I agree Buck. I can't help but think of the saying "a person who represents him/herself in court has a fool for a client".

A couple of thoughts. 1. I contend that VA erred in interpreting the evidence in the examiner's report 2. I contend that VA erred in its decision in that it did not consider the provisions of 38 CFR 3.344, therefore the reduction is ab initio. Thanks for the help!