TexasMarine

THANK YOU T bird !
I am just very glad the crisis line didn't put this veteran on hold or brush him off.
We all know there was quite a scandal about the crisis line a few months ago...and a FTCA has already been filed for negligence due to the recent suicide of at least one vet because of it. The vet's calls were sent to voice mail and no one called him back.
Serious suicidal ideation needs Immediate care and you were there for this vet. Thank You and Thank God for you too!

Congratulations Green.  And thank you for sharing your time with us.

Very Wow! 
Congrats to you.
And to TBird, a proper salute, Ma'am.
 

It should be soon in this case.
However, I have seen timelines where "with VLJ" had date changes in excess of 10 times.
I have seen "with VLJ" changed to "Administrative Case Management", which is a real "rat hole".
Don't get your hopes to high that it will be "the day after tomorrow", but don't worry that it won't happen.
Be patient, and stay off ebennies.  ;)
 

And then you've got to spank them for ignoring what you've been saying all along.

And then you've got to spank them for ignoring what you've been saying all along.

Good advice Pete.  On all 3 trips to the BVA, I was awarded benefits (except the last one, where everything was denied) and, the RO failed to implement them.  Its like you are dealing with an 8 year old:
1.  You have to give them advance notice you are going to tell them they need to do something.
2.  You have to remind them the date is coming up, in a week.
3.  You have to remind them the big day is tomorrow. 
4.  You need to tell them in the morning, what time the big day is.
5. You need to go get them at the applicable time and escort them to the Big day room.
6. You have to listen, and then interpret what they said.
7.  The following day, you ask them what they plan on doing now that the big day happened
8. YOu need to help make a plan on implementing the big day.
9.  You need to remind them to implement the plan.
10.  You need to call them and make sure they did it.  

The crazy one here, Bronco and Texas, these situations are very frustrating but if you get a remand from either CAVC or BVA make sure that you keep your issues addressed and on appeal and consideration.  The RO is notorious for granted an issue but not granting the correct effective date or granting a lower rating percentage.  In most cases once a claim is granted from CAVC and or BVA that particular issuse should have reached static and should not be severed but VA will try to re-evaluate to reduce the rating if they have not already screwed your decision. I know you guys already know this but just passing it on.

My first trip to the CAVC ended up as a JMR because the RO and BVA did not address on of my included claims.  The second trip ended as a JMR as well, because the BVA didn't review properly recorded evidence.  Now I'm back at the BVA waiting for the AMC to opine on that evidence and that of the C&P examiner.
I hope I don't have to go to the CAVC a third time, but the AMC has had my case for over 6 months.

Buck...
   The science of the link between PTSD and sleep apnea is strong and established.  
   Back in 2007, when I was first diagnosed with sleep apnea, the VA doc wrote that the OSA was "the result of" MDD.  
   A few months ago, when I went with my wife to the sleep doc to get her cpap, I asked the private doc., 
"Do you think sleep apnea is related to depression (or PTSD)?"  
    He responded, "Yes.  MDD/PTSD have almost the same symptoms as sleep apnea."
   After he said that, I remembered.  One of the ways they diagnose depression is sleep problems.  You know nightmares, can't fall asleep, etc.  
    I also know that "not enough oxygen"  to your heart at night causes problems.  News Flash!  Not enough Oxygen is very serious, and life threatening.  It also causes changes in your brain, especially when it happens every night.  Chemical changes.  Depression.  
Here is a BVA "case in point:
Citation Nr: 0102100 
Decision Date: 01/25/01 Archive Date: 01/31/01
DOCKET NO. 99-22 315 ) DATE 
On appeal from the 
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Louis, 
Missouri

THE ISSUE
Entitlement to service connection for sleep apnea as 
secondary to service-connected post-traumatic stress disorder 
(PTSD).

REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
Richard A. Cohn, Associate Counsel

INTRODUCTION
The veteran served on active duty from April 1970 to December 
1971.
This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals 
(Board) on appeal from an August 1999 rating decision of the 
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office in St. 
Louis, Missouri (RO) which denied service connection for 
sleep apnea as secondary to service-connected PTSD.

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The record includes all evidence necessary for the 
equitable disposition of this appeal.
2. There is competent medical evidence linking current sleep 
apnea to the veteran's service-connected PTSD.

CONCLUSION OF LAW
The veteran's sleep apnea was aggravated by his service- 
connected PTSD. Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000, Pub. 
L. No. 106-475, 114 Stat. 2096 (2000); 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107, 
38 C.F.R. § 3.310(a) (2000).

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION
The veteran attributes sleep apnea to his service-connected 
PTSD. The veteran does not contend that he incurred or 
aggravated sleep apnea during service and there is no 
evidence of sleep apnea or other sleep disorder in the 
veteran's service medical records SMRs.
Procedurally, this appeal is developed fully and ready for 
Board adjudication. The RO has verified the veteran's period 
of service; there is no issue as to the substantial 
completeness of the veteran's application for VA benefits; 
the veteran has undergone VA examination pursuant to the 
application; the RO has requested and associated with the 
claims file all available service and postservice medical 
records pertinent to this appeal; VA is unaware of other 
unrequested records pertinent to this appeal, and; the 
evidence is sufficient to permit the Board to proceed with 
appellate review. See Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 
2000, Pub. L. No. 106-475, 114 Stat. 2096, (2000).
A veteran may be entitled to service connection for a 
disability under either a direct or secondary analysis. 
Direct service connection is warranted for disability 
resulting from disease or injury incurred or aggravated in 
service. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1110, 1131 (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. § 
3.303 (2000). Secondary service connection is warranted both 
for a disability caused by a service-connected disorder and 
for a disability aggravated by a service-connected disorder. 
38 C.F.R. § 3.310(a) (2000). In the latter case, 
compensation is limited to the extent to which the service- 
connected disorder increased the severity of the secondary 
disorder. Allen v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 439, 448 (1995); Jones 
(Wayne) v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 134, 136-37 (1994). A service- 
connected secondary disorder becomes part of the original 
disorder. 38 C.F.R. § 3.310(a).
The veteran is a decorated former Army combat soldier whose 
PTSD has been service-connected since July 1995. SMRs 
include no evidence of a sleep disorder in service and the 
veteran claims none.
VA medical records confirm that the veteran underwent sleep 
studies in February and October 1998 from which he was 
diagnosed with sleep apnea. A VA psychiatric progress note 
from February 1999 briefly reviewed the studies' findings and 
applicable research and concluded that PTSD and its treatment 
"in all probability has aggravated the obstructive sleep 
apnea." The note further states that "it is certainly as 
likely as not that this veteran's sleep apnea is directly 
related to his PTSD." The VA physician who examined the 
veteran in July 1999 identified two likely causes of his 
sleep apnea: enlarged tonsillar tissue and obesity. The 
physician found no etiological connection between PTSD and 
enlarged tonsillar tissue. However, he acknowledged that 
"an argument could be made" linking the veteran's obesity 
with PTSD although the veteran's medical records did not 
include another medical opinion to that effect.
In the Board's judgment the record presents adequate evidence 
upon which to base a finding that the veteran's PTSD 
aggravated his sleep apnea. The opinion expressed in the 
February 1999 progress note is neither ambiguous nor 
equivocal on that point. The July 1999 examination report is 
more tentative -- finding only a medical possibility of 
attenuated causality under a different rationale. 
Nevertheless, the July 1999 opinion does not refute the 
February 1999 opinion, and it is well established that VA 
itself may not refute expert medical conclusions in the 
record with its own unsubstantiated medical conclusions. 
Colvin v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 171, 175. (1991). 
Therefore, absent medical evidence actually denying a causal 
linkage between PTSD and sleep apnea in this case, the Board 
reads the two opinions together as providing, at minimum, 
evidentiary equipoise which must be resolved in the veteran's 
favor. See 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(b). Accordingly, the Board is 
constrained to find that service connection for sleep apnea 
is warranted here under a secondary analysis. See 38 C.F.R. 
§ 3.310.

ORDER
Service connection for sleep apnea is granted secondary to 
service-connected PTSD.
 

Wablackwell, Texas Marine brought up a very good point. However, the VA is also supposed to give weight to the length of time the MH doctor has been treating you, and with your stressors, i really dont see even the VA Doc giving you a negative exam, BUT...if you have also been under the care of a psychiatrist, see if he/she will complete a dbq for you as well as your long term psychologist. Texas Marine did make a great point!

In many PTSD cases, a positive end result occurs when the VA representative rules in  your favor.  In most of these cases the claim was considered by two mental health professionals.  One for you, and one for the VA (C&P).  Each of the MH Pros are weighted, based on their status.  If the VA's MH Pro is a psychologist, and yours is a Psychiatrist, that "weighs" more heavily in your favor.  Conversely, if the VA puts up a psychiatrist, and you put up a psychologist, that would work against your goals, if the VA's Pro gave you poor results. If both are Psychiatrists, the number and type of letters behind their names, determines who's opinion is favored.  Now, this is just a limited view of the process, but a Psychiatrist's opinion will always weigh more that that of a nurse practioner for example.  This example assumes both sides developed their respective findings properly.
jmho
TexasMarine

This seems to be a classic case of "What evidence does VA have?" and "When did they have it?"
You need to order "more" than just your NPRC records, tho those are good, you need a copy of your Cfile.  
Don't "guess" what VA has/does not have.  This is your life and your benefits, so dont take chances with them.  
I do not know if you can get a copy of your cfile before your appeal period expires or not.  But you want to file a NOD before the year either way.  
1.  IF there IS this evidence in your C file, then VA either a) didnt read it, or misinterpreted what it said.  This is highly likely.  Berta often says VA wont read their evidence.  You file a nod, on the applicable nod form.  
2.  If the evidence is NOT in your cfile, then you need to resubmit this evidence (within the appeal period) and request a reopen due to 38 CFR 3.156.   YOu can ALSO file a NOD.   

Often times a magic-8-ball is more accurate than eBenefits.  Or to put it in VA terminology "a magic-8-ball is at least as likely as not to be more accurate than eBenefits"

From what I've read on this forum, and what I've personally experienced, the section of ebenefits that reports the status of claims and the status of appeals is like reading tea-leaves.  Yes, it does give you an idea of where your claim is at in the process, but it seems dated.  In addition, as you progress through the stati, you may find your case moving backward at times for no apparent reason.  Most hadit folks will agree that while ebenefits is a habit, you would do better to get a hobby and wait for the big brown envelope (or BBE), or cash in your account.

Yeah.  The process becomes part of you.  Your inner being and who you were in the past, and who you see yourself as now,  is so tied  up in the VA claims process.  Not to mention your pride.  And here the VA is poised to call you a liar and deny your claim.  Seems very adversarial.  But if you can, forget about for awhile, and spend some more quality time with the kids.

From what I've read on this forum, and what I've personally experienced, the section of ebenefits that reports the status of claims and the status of appeals is like reading tea-leaves.  Yes, it does give you an idea of where your claim is at in the process, but it seems dated.  In addition, as you progress through the stati, you may find your case moving backward at times for no apparent reason.  Most hadit folks will agree that while ebenefits is a habit, you would do better to get a hobby and wait for the big brown envelope (or BBE), or cash in your account.

Definitely. She's been the best therapy for me and a life saver. She keeps me gainfully employed 24-7. 

From what I've read on this forum, and what I've personally experienced, the section of ebenefits that reports the status of claims and the status of appeals is like reading tea-leaves.  Yes, it does give you an idea of where your claim is at in the process, but it seems dated.  In addition, as you progress through the stati, you may find your case moving backward at times for no apparent reason.  Most hadit folks will agree that while ebenefits is a habit, you would do better to get a hobby and wait for the big brown envelope (or BBE), or cash in your account.

2007 was the 1994 grant of tinnitus for $15K. 2008 was a year and a half retro @ 100% for about $38 K and the January 2014 was about $338K and some change. The Writ is for chump change- about $78K. It adds up when they forget about you. We'll give a chunk to Fisher House and Navy Marine Corps Relief.

Believe it or not, the money was immaterial. My wife's family is blessed and she's an only child. We did well on investments in spite of my illness. I may not have decided to fight VA but they said I was never in Vietnam. I spent two years over there, have three combat Vs and a lot of dead friends. It pissed me off just enough to stay alive long enough to set the record straight. I didn't think it would take this long. You can call me late for dinner but never call me a liar.

Clear prop

From what I've read on this forum, and what I've personally experienced, the section of ebenefits that reports the status of claims and the status of appeals is like reading tea-leaves.  Yes, it does give you an idea of where your claim is at in the process, but it seems dated.  In addition, as you progress through the stati, you may find your case moving backward at times for no apparent reason.  Most hadit folks will agree that while ebenefits is a habit, you would do better to get a hobby and wait for the big brown envelope (or BBE), or cash in your account.

Crossfit702,  i want to add, be very careful with the childhood trauma issues. You are presumed sound upon acceptance into the armed services, but i can see the VA trying to blame everything on your childhood. I would be truthful when asked, just dont go into too much detail and STRESS that you had no ptsd symptoms until during or after service. Even if you already had some issues, i would think those issues would be aggravated by service, especially if you served in combat. JMO, and best of luck to you.

It sounds like VARO denied service connection, you appealed to the board and the SC denial was overturned.    This means the RO has to grant service connection but will likely decide a percentage.  Low ball or even no ball is a distinct possibility.  This means VA can rate you low, such as 10 percent, or even none, (0%).  VA loves to issue 0 percent ratings especially for hearing loss.  
Remember, its the VA's purpose to deny and delay as long as possible.  Alex Graham recently got benefits back to 1994...that is, a 20 year delay.  
Im still wet behind the ears and am a relative newcomber, with my delay "only" 14 years.  Of course, these delays are "in stages". 
Stage 1.  VA delays as long as they can, then denies.  You appeal. 
Stage 2.  You finally win the appeal and VA delays you again by lowballing or awarding 0 percent.  You appeal. 
Stage 3.  This is when you finally get the percentage you deserve and then VA only goes back a few months, hornswaggling you on the effective date.  You appeal.
Stage 4.  You finally win your effective date, and 100%, and VA hornswaggles you on SMC, such as SMC S.   You dont appeal, because you die.  Your widow does a substitution (if she knows about this), and hires a lawyer.  
Stage 5.  You finally get your benefits, your effective date, your SMC but you are dead and fail to file the nod timely.  The VA informs you that its your fault for not appealing timely.    Then  VA denies survivor benefits such as DIC to your widow.  YOur widow appeals.  She dies before the VA can make a decision, so your family looses out.  VA wins.  
Stage 6.  Your grandchildren decide not to join the military as they heard about "VA benefits", and how long it took for your deceased grandfather and grandmother.
These are the six stages of VA claims process.    
 

Wablackwell, that is a very smart move, with luck (and by having TWO dbqs), you might not even have to go to a c&p exam. I wish you the Best of Luck!

In many PTSD cases, a positive end result occurs when the VA representative rules in  your favor.  In most of these cases the claim was considered by two mental health professionals.  One for you, and one for the VA (C&P).  Each of the MH Pros are weighted, based on their status.  If the VA's MH Pro is a psychologist, and yours is a Psychiatrist, that "weighs" more heavily in your favor.  Conversely, if the VA puts up a psychiatrist, and you put up a psychologist, that would work against your goals, if the VA's Pro gave you poor results. If both are Psychiatrists, the number and type of letters behind their names, determines who's opinion is favored.  Now, this is just a limited view of the process, but a Psychiatrist's opinion will always weigh more that that of a nurse practioner for example.  This example assumes both sides developed their respective findings properly.
jmho
TexasMarine