GlassRose1500

Did some research - cases mainy. I meet this : "impossible for the disabled person, without assistance, to rise from a seated position and from a stooped position (fingers to toes position) and to maintain postural stability (the pelvis upon head of femur)." (can't get up fm seated position without assistance from another, can't touch my toes anyways, and require stabalization for the brief time I stand while transfering) But it is because of derangement of the nerves and atrophy / reduction of strength through lack of use, not:"severe damage by disease or injury to muscle group XVII

Thanks for posting the language on the buttocks - the Rater asked the C&P Examiner to answer the question, but it was based on my loss of sensation - I have no, er, sensation related warning of incontinence, and over sensation - often my cheeks are on fire as if I was sitting in hot water, or buring with pain. Interesting.

Thanks for the reply :) I have from my PCP the form that says I require A&A and am housebound in fact. Also one of the C&P is for A&A. I would, under this scenario, qualify for statutory housebound as well. My VSO is not able to assess what the SMC results might be, in terms of how things would get bundled and stacked. I confess despite the copious reading I've done, I cannot hazard a guess either.

An update, asknod - and I hope it finds you well. I have been decidedly unwell to the point I gave up caring about all this. Some recent developments raised my curiousity, and I found enough energy to fill you in. As always, I welcome your thoughts (as well as any of the other amazingly empathetic and knowledgeable veterans on this forum). My NOD late in 2014 included disagreement with ratings for SC Knee and Migraine conditions, and also asked that the SMC evaluation be performed, as per a bunch of regulations which I won't rehash here. The DRO carved out SMC as a NEW claim, sayi

Great suggestion, on hold with Peggy now. Also drafting the NOD amendment and pulling together the new supporting evidence. Will take it to my DAV and BVA guys as soon as its finished. Thanks for the suggested language, big help : )

I was fortunate that my local VAMedCenter has a representative who works for the BVA out of the local RO office. He has the ability to scan it in directly, and he did. My DAV representative (also located at my local VAMedCenter) is also capable of having it scanned in locally by calling his guys at the downtown office which is located right next to the BVA office. BOTH of these methods BYPASS Georgia. Just because they CAN doesn't mean they will. Especially if you don't ask. Good Luck! GR

I'll get right on researching that. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction. I want to ensure DRO review w/face to fave stays on track. It may be I chose the path of new and material evidence at some future point w loss of 2012 date. Tks. My fellow Night Owl...

Apparently I do have the IQ of a pet rock because I missed these unadjudicated issues completely... the NOD I filed was timely. An amendment would not be, unless you are saying the form you referenced would permit the amendment so long as the initial nod was timely?

I was looking at my(VA form 21-438) fm early 2012 to quote some language, and found three unadjudicated claims for SC / Comp, including lower left radiculopathy related to SC IVDS/DDD, and Cervical Spine Condition with bilateral upper radiculopathy. I cannot believe I didn't catch that - I was so focused on what they did address I forgot to look at what they didn't (and they didn't - in any way shape or form - not as deferred, just no mention). The NOD is in, and doesn't include any info about these unadjudicated issues, but as I understand it they will remain open until adjudicated, s

@asknod Hmmm, yes, our temperatures would be a problem for you from October through parts of March - though not today. It's raining... Thanks for your analysis AND your kind words - I'll let you know how it goes. It does seem to be going a little faster than it should, by rights. It was submitted on Nov 21st, picked up for review mid-December, and a few days ago it went into gathering evidence. My VBA said it's already with a DRO (he called what for him is his home office). I am not going to hope for anything less than 2 years, because that's the going duration, but when I learned

p.s. asknod - very sorry to hear about your PCT diagnosis. Come live in Ohio - I believe our lakeside city has the fewest sunny days in the nation - or we're a close second.

Don't want MDD @100. Shouldn't be. So I wouldn't ask for it. Would like my life back. Would like my husband, also a Marine to have what he deserves (and I don't mean a stipend, I mean a WIFE). Thanks for taking a look. I think it's best for me to not care about it or try to understand it any longer, at least for now.

The spine, sciatica and legs are SC, the MDD is a 70%, right where it should be. The stuff in blue in my long long long post is from two different court cases where they awarded SMC A&A on appeal with that language embedded in the analysis (that TDIU satisfies 100% in the criteria for A&A). I respect both of your opinions greatly, but am confused by the discrepencies between your thoughts and what I'm reading from appeals cases, and what both the DAV and VBA guys have advised, but I think the real problem is you can't see my entire case. My life. And it's way too much to ask - to a

Since I was previously rated TDIU and that rating would have supported SMC, the increase in rating to schedular cannot negatively impact the veteran's benefits. I'll find the case and put it in... I think Berta shared it with me.

@asknod. Thank you for taking the time to analyze my situation. I had SMC mapped out a totally different way, so thinking about loss of funtion without aids (e.g., knees with rigid bracing AND walker or wheelchair as a K, or two Ks, since bilateral) is a complete departure fm my previous analysis and will require a good deal more thought on my part. Here was the basis of my analysis. The main question is are SC disabilities that necessitate A&A specified? I was led to believe they were NOT (rather, "need for A&A, in fact") and therefore could be utilized as I described in m