allan

Symptoms of Mesothelioma A person suffering from mesothelioma will experience slightly different symptoms depending on which type of the disease they are inflicted with. Specific symptoms of Pleural Mesothelioma: • Shortness of breath * • A persistent cough • Pleural effusion • Pain in the lower back* • Pain in the side of chest * • Raspy voice • Difficulty swallowing* • Fever • Night sweats* • Weight loss* Specific symptoms of Peritoneal mesothelioma: • Weight loss* • Abdominal pain* • Buildup of fluid in the abdomen, thus causing swelling* • Bowel obstruction* • Abnormal blood clotting* • Anemia • Nausea* • Vomiting • Fever • Swelling of the feet* Specific symptoms of Pericardial mesothelioma: • Excessive coughing • Shortness of breath* • Chest pain* • Nausea* • Weight loss* • Vomiting • Loss of appetite* • Palpitations* Symptoms of mesothelioma are generally nonspecific and sometimes can resemble other less serious conditions. Only a doctor can make a definite diagnosis of the disease. Though the slow onset of its development may be deceiving, mesothelioma is a swift killer once symptoms have fully manifested themselves. If you or someone you know thinks they may be suffering from mesothelioma, it is important to contact a physician or a mesothelioma cancer center as soon as possible. http://www.mesotheliomatreatmentcenters.or...n/symptoms.html The Importance of Early Diagnosis for Mesothelioma Patients The importance of early diagnosis for mesothelioma patients cannot be overemphasized. If you have a history of asbestos exposure—whether from a workplace, your home, or at a public building such as a school—it's in your best interest to consult a knowledgeable physician even if you have no symptoms of mesothelioma or other asbestos-caused disease. Early diagnosis is especially important because by the time symptoms of mesothelioma appear, usually 20 – 50 years after the initial exposure, the disease is already in an advanced phase. An early diagnosis is necessary for the best prognosis. Early Diagnosis May Increase Life Expectancy The importance of early diagnosis for mesothelioma patients is also reinforced by the short life-expectancy of individuals with this disease. If the mesothelioma is at an advanced stage at the time of diagnosis, the average life expectancy is roughly one to two years. If an individual's mesothelioma is "caught" at an early stage, treatment can be initiated that much sooner, and it may be easier to hold off the advance of the cancer. More Effective, Tolerable Treatment Mesothelioma may be described as "localized" or "advanced.” The mesothelioma is localized when the cancer cells are found only at the body site where the cancer originated. If the cancer cells have spread beyond that original location, the mesothelioma is considered advanced. Treating a limited area of cancer is easier than trying to treat cancer that has spread (metastasized) to several sites or throughout the body, and thus an early diagnosis for a mesothelioma patient can enable more effective and more tolerable treatment. Mesothelioma Symptoms Symptoms of mesothelioma may include the following: • Chest pain * • Shortness of breath * • A chronic cough • Weight loss * • Fever • Abdominal swelling* • Abdominal pain * • Blood clotting abnormalities * • Bowel obstructions* • Lowered red blood cell count • Irregular heartbeat* If you're experiencing some of these symptoms (especially chest pain) and you have a history of asbestos exposure, it doesn't mean that you definitely have mesothelioma. However, it's best to seek medical testing for an early diagnosis, no matter what the problem is. Learn More about the Importance of Early Diagnosis for Mesothelioma Patients If you are concerned that you or a loved one may be at risk for developing mesothelioma or another asbestos-caused disease, you can contact us for more information . Stages of Mesothelioma Medical professionals currently use three different mesothelioma-staging systems to diagnose and treat pleural mesothelioma. Each system measures different variables including the extent of the cancer, lymph node involvement, metastasis, and more. 1. Butchart System is the oldest and most commonly used mesothelioma staging system and is primarily based on the extent of the tumor mass. Butchart System divides mesothelioma into four stages: • Stage I – Mesothelioma is seen in the right or left side of the chest area, or pleura cavity, and may also be found in the diaphragm. • Stage II – Mesothelioma has invaded the chest lining and reaches the esophagus, heart, or pleura on both sides. Lymph nodes may also be affected. • Stage III – Mesothelioma has passed the diaphragm and entered the abdominal cavity or peritoneum. Lymph nodes beyond the chest may also be affected. • Stage IV – Mesothelioma has spread through the bloodstream to other organs 2. TNM System is a more recent system used to stage mesothelioma by considering variables such as the tumor size and spread, lymph node involvement, and metastasis. In the TNM system, the disease is divided into four stages: • Stage I – Mesothelioma is in the right or left chest cavity and may have spread to the pericardium, diaphragm, or lung on the same side. Lymph nodes are not affected. • Stage II – Mesothelioma has spread from one side of the chest to a lymph node near the lung on the same side. The disease may have also spread to the lung, diaphragm, or pericardium on the same side. • Stage III – Mesothelioma has entered the chest wall, muscle, heart, esophagus, ribs, and vital organs in the pleural cavity on the same side. Lymph nodes may or may not be affected on the side of the tumor. • Stage IV – Mesothelioma has spread to the lymph nodes in the chest area on the other side of the tumor, or has spread to the pleural cavity or lung on the other side, or has reached organs in the abdominal area or neck. Any metastasis is involved in the fourth stage. 3. Brigham System is the latest mesothelioma staging system and is based on tumor resectability (ability to surgically remove) and lymph node status. The Brigham system is divided into five stages: • Stage I – Mesothelioma is resectable and lymph nodes are not involved • Stage II – Mesothelioma is resectable, but lymph nodes are involved • Stage III – Mesothelioma is unresectable and has spread to the chest wall, diaphragm, heart, or abdominal area. Lymph nodes may or may not be involved. • Stage IV – Distant metastatic mesothelioma

Symptoms of Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome - PCOS http://womenshealth.about.com/cs/pcos/a/sympcos.htm

Serotonin syndrome, also known as hyperserotonemia or serotonergic syndrome, is a potentially life-threatening condition in which there is an excess of serotonin in the central nervous system. Causes: Serotonin syndrome may be caused by use of high doses of serotonergic drugs, combination of more than one serotonergic drug or when antidepressants are switched without allowing for a "washout" period. http://depression.about.com/od/depressionm...p/serotonin.htm

Serotonin Syndrome: Recognition and Management http://www.uspharmacist.com:80/oldformat.a...eat/acf2fa6.htm

Congratulations Tower Rat!!!!!

Complete Document: STATEMENT OF STEVE SMITHSON, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR CLAIMS SERVICES VETERANS AFFAIRS AND REHABILITATION DIVISION THE AMERICAN LEGION BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON DISABILITY ASSISTANCE AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON THE TRAINING PROVIDED TO VETERANS BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION CLAIMS ADJUDICATORS AND THE STANDARDS USED TO MEASURE THEIR PROFICENCY AND PERFORMANCE SEPTEMBER 13, 2006 Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: Thank you for this opportunity to present The American Legion’s views on the training provided to Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) claims adjudicators and the standards used to measure their proficiency and performance. We commend the Subcommittee for holding this hearing to discuss these important issues. Training Proper mandatory training is a key factor in the quality of Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regional office rating decisions. The Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA) combined remand and reversal rate (59.4 percent) of regional office decisions for Fiscal Year 2005 is a direct reflection of the lack of importance placed on training by the VA regional offices. Over the past few years, The American Legion’s Quality Review Team has visited almost 40 VA regional offices for the purpose of assessing overall operation. The American Legion reviews recently adjudicated claims and interviews service center staff. Our site visits reveal that, at many regional offices, there have been too few experienced supervisors that could provide trainee adjudicators proper mentoring and quality assurance. In addition, at many stations, ongoing training for the new hires as well as the more experienced staff would be postponed or suspended, so as to focus maximum effort on production. Although the Under Secretary for Benefits has stated on numerous occasions that training of personnel is a top priority within VBA, the inconsistency in VBA’s training approach and in its implementation needs to be thoroughly reviewed and addressed by upper management within the Department. In the experience of The American Legion, the lack of proper training and oversight adversely impacts all areas of VBA. Please note that each of VBA’s 57 regional offices appear to have different approaches to training and also differ in the importance placed on training. According to a May 2005 report from the VA Office of the Inspector General (VAOIG) based on a survey of rating veteran service representatives (RVSRs) and decision review offices (DROs), the respondents expressed positive opinions regarding the quality of their training but indicated that training has not received high priority. 57 percent reported the quality of training to be good or very good 16 percent reported the quality of training to be poor or very poor 45 percent reported that they had received 10 hours or less of formal classroom instruction on rating policies and procedures in the last 12 months. 24.1 percent reported that they had received 11-20 hours of formal classroom instruction in the last 12 months. 18.0 percent responded that their regional office provides formal classroom instruction on rating policies and procedures once a week. 45.6 percent responded that their regional office provides formal classroom instruction on rating policies and procedures once a month. 36.4 percent responded that their regional office provides formal classroom instruction on rating policies and procedures once a quarter or less often. The information obtained in the VAOIG’s survey is consistent with what The American Legion has found in talking to service center staff during our quality review site visits. Some stations have regular formalized or structured training programs, while others have training programs that are best described as more informal and sporadic. Some stations have well established and structured training for new employees, but ongoing training for experienced staff is very limited. We are appreciative of the importance the Under Secretary for Benefits has placed on training of VBA personnel. We are also aware of the centralized training program that has been implemented; however, a national training standard/requirement, in addition to the centralized training conducted by Compensation and Pension Service (C&P), for regional office personnel is also needed. Consistent and standardized training at each regional office must take place for all personnel—experienced and new hires alike. The American Legion believes it is crucial that such a program be implemented and closely monitored for compliance by the Under Secretary for Benefits. Management in stations not in compliance with such training requirements must be held accountable; otherwise any national or centralized training effort will not be successful. Additionally, The American Legion believes it is essential to proper training that information (reasons for remand or reversal) from BVA decisions, DRO decisions and errors noted in National STAR and other internal quality reviews be tracked and examined for patterns. This information should then be used in mandatory formal training to ensure that common errors and other discrepancies occurring in regional office rating decisions are not repeated. This information should also be used for remedial training purposes when patterns of errors are identified for specific individuals. Although such data is currently being collected and disseminated to the regional offices, it appears that consistent utilization of this data in regular formalized and specific training has been lacking. Unless regional offices (both managers and individual adjudicators) learn from their mistakes and take corrective action, there will continue to be a high rate of improperly adjudicated claims, resulting in a consistently high appeals rate and subsequent high BVA remand/reversal rate of regional office decisions. Performance Standards The emphasis on production continues to be a driving force in the VA regional office, often taking priority over such things as training and quality assurance. Performance standards of adjudicators and rating specialists are centered on productivity as measured by work credits, known as “End Products”. Both veteran service representatives (VSRs) and rating veteran service representatives (RVSRs) have minimum national productivity requirements that must be met each day. Some stations also set their own standards, based on their claims backlog and other station specific requirements that is over and above the national requirement. Unfortunately, the end product work measurement system essentially pits the interests of the claimant against the needs of VA managers. The conflict is created because the regional offices have a vested interest in adjudicating as many claims as possible in the shortest amount of time. This creates a built-in incentive to take shortcuts so that the End Product can be taken. The system, in effect, rewards regional offices for the gross amount of work they report, not whether the work is done accurately or correctly, often resulting in many claims being prematurely adjudicated. These problems are caused by inadequate development, failure to routinely identify all relevant issues and claims and ratings based on inadequate examinations. Such errors are often overshadowed by the desire of VA managers to claim quick End Product credit. The result has been a traditionally high remand rate by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA) and the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC). The BVA’s combined remand and reversal rate (59.4 percent) for Fiscal Year 2005 is arguably a direct reflection of the greater emphasis placed on production over training and quality assurance. It seems to The American Legion that VBA management has been reluctant to establish a rigorous quality assurance program to avoid exposing the longstanding history of the manipulation of workload data and policies that contribute to poor quality decision-making and the high volume of appeals. VBA’s quality-related problems and the fact that little or no action is being taken to prevent or discourage the taking of premature End Products have been longstanding issues for The American Legion. The current work measurement system, and corresponding performance standards, are used to promote bureaucratic interests of regional office management and VBA rather than protecting and advancing the rights of veterans. The end product work measurement system, as managed by the VA, does not encourage regional office managers to ensure that adjudicators do the “right thing” for veterans the first time. For example, denying a claim three or four times in the course of a year before granting the benefit sought allows for a total of 5 end product work credits to be counted for this one case, rather than promptly granting the benefit and taking only one work credit. In the view of The American Legion, the need for a substantial change in VBA’s work measurement system is long overdue. A more accurate reliable work measurement system would help to ensure better service to veterans. Ultimately, this would require the establishment of a work measurement system that does not allow work credit to be taken until the decision in the claim becomes final, meaning that no further action is permitted by statute whether because the claimant has failed to initiate a timely appeal or because the BVA rendered a final decision. Proficiency/Competency C&P conducted an open book (pilot) job skill certification test for VSRs several years ago in which the pass rate was extremely low (approximately 23 percent). Even more alarming than the low-test scores was the fact that those who took the test had several years of experience in the position and were considered to be proficient. C&P subsequently finalized its VSR proficiency test and conducted tests in May and August of this year. Employees participating in the testing underwent 20 hours of training prior to taking the test and the success rate (approximately 42 percent) for the May test was much higher than the pilot test. The results for the August test have not been released yet. C&P plans on conducting two VSR tests each year, one in winter and the other in the summer. The American Legion applauds the new testing program as a step in the right direction but we still have concerns. Although successful completion of the test will be required for promotion or assignment to a rating board, it is not mandatory as a condition of employment in that position. C&P is in the process of developing a test for RVSRs and DROs but a timeline for completion or implementation has not yet been determined. Unfortunately, like the VSR test, the test for RVSRs and DROs will not be mandatory as a condition of employment. The goal of competency testing is to ensure that an individual in any given position is competent, proficient, and otherwise qualified to perform the duties required of that position. This testing goal will not be achieved if testing is not mandatory or is not provided for all levels or for all positions. Closing The American Legion realizes that VBA faces many difficult challenges during the upcoming fiscal year. Although we have offered our suggestions and comments, we realize that there is no easy solution and we will continue to work closely with VA to ensure our nation’s veterans receive the benefits to which they are entitled. That concludes my testimony. I will be happy to answer any questions. SOURCE: http://veterans.house.gov/hearings/schedul...veSmithson.html

The DVA is as good at ignoring laws favorable to the Veteran, as they are creating them. There's thieves doing time trying to figure out how to get a perfect crime going, like what some of these rating Specialists have. Absolutely, "NO" accountability? If that ain't a scam set up by an insurance company, I don't know what is. I don't see any party allowing this to continue in the future, unless they want a battle on their hands. It's acceptable to steal federal benefits from disabled veterans and be rewarded for it? You can't spit in our face any more, thats illegal. But you can steal from those who have gave and risked their lives to protect you? I honestly feel that such acts in this country, should receive serious repercussions in a court of law. No one working as a government agent, should hold themselves above the law & commit crimes against military personnel, such as to steal their disability benefits for prophet. If they receive a bonus for any criminal act against disabled veterans, they should have to repay it to the veteran with interest, plus interest on the claim from the time the crime was committed. Our military families are paying interest on the debts they've accumulated waiting on their benefits. If it takes two signitures to sign off on an aproved claim, why not do the same for a denial? If the errors & criminal acts get past the two signitures on the denial, those who signed off on it should also loose their bonus and pay interest to the veteran and family on appeal. If you want to stop the crime, changes in laws MUST have some serious teeth in it, or there is NO deterant to stop it from happening again. If there are errors on a decision by a rating officer, they shouldn't get paid for that rating. They should only recieve pay for deciding a claim correctly, wether it's favorable or unfavorable. Remands should come with a monatary penalty back to the rater for any errors, along with a warning for federal charges of, "obstruction of justice" if the same error is repeated more than twice. A Veteran and their families sure pay a price for any sinceless delay in recieving the benefit. Absolutely, "NO" accountability? Payback is right. It's time to blow this out of the water. I completely agree that a march on DC is the "ONLY" way to get er done. Just a few thoughts. Allan

VA NEWS FLASH from Larry Scott at VA Watchdog dot Org -- 10-01-2007 #1 GUN BILL NOT ANTI-VETERAN -- Let's use some common sense instead of nonsense about H.R. 2640. If you're a veteran or you have been diagnosed with PTSD, don't worry, they aren't coming for your firearms. The Managing Editor of Military.com asked me to write this article about H.R. 2640. This legislation has been falsely portrayed as anti-veteran. Plainly and simply, it has nothing to do with veterans and will NOT bar anyone with a diagnosis of PTSD from purchasing firearms and ammo. I have read all the arguments against H.R. 2640. They are erroneous and lack merit. And, they are only being used to needlessly scare veterans, especially those with a diagnosis of PTSD. This is legislation that the National Rifle Association (NRA) helped craft and fully supports. Think about. Would the NRA support any bill that would take away firearms from veterans? Of course not! (NOTE: Full disclosure -- I am not an NRA member.) Article below: ------------------------- Gun Bill Not Anti-Veteran by Larry Scott There is no such thing as the "Veterans Disarmament Act." There is no pending legislation that would take firearms away from veterans. There is no pending legislation that would prevent a person with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), veteran or not, from purchasing a firearm or ammo. But, there is a huge campaign of misinformation and scare tactics being forwarded by a small gun owners group who view themselves to be in competition with the National Rifle Association (NRA). Let's use some common sense instead of nonsense. If veterans were to lose the right to own firearms, you'd have a lot of unemployed cops. If those who have PTSD were to lose that right, there'd be even more unemployed cops and other first responders, as well. The arguments about a "Veterans Disarmament Act" are, quite simply, ridiculous and illogical. The piece of legislation is question is H.R. 2640, the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007. (see Thomas in links at end of article) H.R. 2640 was carefully-crafted by the NRA and Members of Congress to protect the rights of gun owners, especially those who may have mental health issues such as PTSD. The NICS is the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, the database that contains the names of those not allowed to buy firearms and ammo. There are nine specific groups of persons who are included in the database. (see Nine Groups in links) Included is anyone "has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution." "Any mental institution" would, obviously, include a VA hospital mental ward. And, the government's definition of a "mental defective" is: "A determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that a person, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease: (1) Is a danger to himself or to others; or (2) Lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs. The term shall include a finding of insanity by a court in a criminal case." The confusion over H.R. 2640 and veterans, especially veterans with PTSD, began in 2000 when the VA gave the names of between 83,000 and 89,000 veterans to the NICS database. The names were of veterans who had been committed to VA psychiatric wards or who had been adjudicated as a "mental defective." This was required of all government agencies. Some thought that any veteran with a mental health issue ended up on the NICS list. That is an absurd assumption. If a veteran tries to quit smoking and goes to VA smoking cessation classes, they are in a mental health program because nicotine is considered an addictive substance. The same applies for those seeking treatment for alcohol or drug abuse. And, we know, these veterans did not end up in the NICS database. Article continues below: Neither current law nor H.R. 2640 would put any person, including veterans, who have sought psychiatric treatment or voluntarily checked themselves into a psychiatric unit on the NICS list. This includes those with PTSD, those seeking treatment for alcohol or drug abuse and those who have voluntarily sought help and been admitted for observation, sometimes termed a "voluntary commitment." So, why all the noise about H.R. 2640? Some feel the small gun owners group is just looking for members. Others feel they have some kind of beef with the NRA. Whatever the reason, the misinformation and scare tactics should be considered for exactly what they are. The NRA, in the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings that killed over 30 students, realized that current firearms legislation had some real problems. People who should be in the NICS database, like the Virginia Tech shooter, were left out. And, just as important, the NRA knew that some people who shouldn't be in the database had been included and there was no way for them to get their names of the NICS list. Also, some believe there is wiggle-room in the current regulations that can allow government agencies to "interpret" them incorrectly. The NRA set out to solve those problems, and they did. The NRA fully supports H.R. 2640. (see NRA in links) According to the NRA: "Some pro-gun groups have claimed that H.R. 2640 would 'prohibit' thousands of people from owning guns. This is not true...In fact, H.R. 2640 would allow some people now unfairly prohibited from owning guns to have their rights restored, and to have their names removed from the instant check system." H.R. 2640 would require states to provide quarterly information to the NICS database. This information would have to include those who no longer fall into one of the nine categories of "no buy" persons. There would be penalties for states that do not comply. And, the protections, especially for those with mental health issues, assure that a "medical finding of disability" would not put someone in the NICS database. That would include veterans with a diagnosis of PTSD. Here are the protections as stated in H.R. 2640: (1) IN GENERAL- No department or agency of the Federal Government may provide to the Attorney General any record of an adjudication or determination related to the mental health of a person, or any commitment of a person to a mental institution if-- (A) the adjudication, determination, or commitment, respectively, has been set aside or expunged, or the person has otherwise been fully released or discharged from all mandatory treatment, supervision, or monitoring; (B) the person has been found by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority to no longer suffer from the mental health condition that was the basis of the adjudication, determination, or commitment, respectively, or has otherwise been found to be rehabilitated through any procedure available under law; or © the adjudication, determination, or commitment, respectively, is based solely on a medical finding of disability, without a finding that the person is a danger to himself or to others or that the person lacks the mental capacity to manage his own affairs. Please note again that a person cannot be put on the NICS list solely for a "medical finding of disability," and that would include PTSD. Also, H.R. 2640 will provide a means for a person to take their name off the NICS list if they should not be on it, something they cannot do at this time. That provision reads: (A) PROGRAM FOR RELIEF FROM DISABILITIES- Each department or agency of the United States that makes any adjudication or determination related to the mental health of a person or imposes any commitment to a mental institution, as described in subsection (d)(4) and (g)(4) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code, shall establish a program that permits such a person to apply for relief from the disabilities imposed by such subsections. Relief and judicial review shall be available according to the standards prescribed in section 925© of title 18, United States Code. The bottom line for veterans concerned about H.R. 2640 is to just use some common sense. Read the legislation. You may not agree with it. But, if you're a veteran or you have been diagnosed with PTSD, don't worry, they aren't coming for your firearms. The NRA put it correctly when they said, "H.R. 2640 is NOT gun control legislation." It IS legislation designed to end inequities in the current laws that have unfairly prevented many from purchasing firearms and ammo. ---------- Links: Thomas … http://thomas.loc.gov/ Nine Groups … http://www4.law.cornell. edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_s ec_18_00000922----000-.html NRA … http://www.nraila.org/Issues /FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=219&issue=018 ------------------------- Larry Scott -- SOURCE: http://www.vawatchdog.org/07/nf07/nfOCT07/nf100107-1.htm

Rockhound, heres a few links that may help. http://www.merck.com/pubs/mmanual_home/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...h&DB=PubMed http://www.psychologyinfo.com/depression/dysthymic.htm http://www.behavenet.com/capsules/disorders/dsmivtrcodes.htm http://www.pathguy.com/ http://www.iom.edu/

Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) Research and contact information related to Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) at NINDS. ... CRISP Database of NIH Funded Grants; Technology Transfer Office ... http://www.ninds.nih.gov/funding/research/tbi/index.htm

Brain Injury / LATEST MEDICAL RESEARCH Updated: 21 September 2007 http://www.braininjury.com/research.html?g...CFUtyOAodECewXg

The Traumatic Brain Injury National Data Center (TBINDC) The Traumatic Brain Injury Research Laboratory at KMRREC Launches TBIMS with support from NIDRR. Treating New Learning Deficits in MS: http://www.tbindc.org/

>I think the OIG web site has investigation of one or two VARO employees whio were involved in a claims scam. Hello Berta, I know they get busted for cheating the DVA. But, I've never heard of even "one" in all these dacades going to jail for the federal crimes of "obstruction of Justice" for falsely denying a veterans claim with fraudulant statements. I'm not talking about minor errors, I mean outright lies, conceiling evidence and the old favorite, refusing to reconize obvious favorable evidence, like IMO's. ALL Veterans should have equal rights to justice and to be represented by a legal attorney from the very begining. Rating specialists need to be subject to prosecution and a rope. They sure as hell don't mind killing us. Better yet, hang them all & let God sort them out. Sorry, i'm feeling a little bitter today. I realize hanging is somewhat out of the question with so many animal rights activests in the country. Lethal Injection?

The DVA operates exactly as it is designed to by congress. Obama may make some changes after he takes office, but the primary mission of VA will likely remain the same. Has anyone ever heard of a rating specialist, DRO etc going to jail for illegally cheating disabled Veterans out of their benefits? I've heard a few go to jail for cheating the government out of money, but not vets. This is what they get bonuses for. May as well write satan and ask him to stop lying as to ask Congress to protect veterans from such acts.

fwd from: Colonel Dan Send your questions/comments to María Félix-Ortiz, 4301 Broadway, Box 355, San Antonio, TX 78209 or e-mail mfelixortiz@gmail.com San Antonio Express-News -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: James Ret [mailto:alamostation@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2008 10:46 AM To: Dan Cedusky Subject: MRGRG and Military Retiree Health Care Make the News Several weeks ago I forwarded several articles concerning the military health care situation as published in the San Antonio Express news by Dr Maria Felix-Ortiz. I also requested that you drop her a line explaining more about the situation. Apparently enough of us did (usually one letter won't get much results) and she she has come up with another column on the subject. Although she didn't pick my letter, the one she did has some of the same wording. An indication that we may all be on the same sheet of music. Anyone who knows who RS of Tampa Bay is? Thanks to him for a great letter. An e-mail to the good doctor would be appropriate. If you need a reminder on the previous columns, they can be found at: http://www.mysanantonio.com/salife/columni...storyindex.html Jim ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Dr. María Félix-Ortiz: Retired veteran says promises regarding health care broken Web Posted: 01/01/2008 12:03 PM CST San Antonio Express-News Dear Dr. Felix-Ortiz: I am a retired military veteran with a little over 35 years of active military service. I retired in 1981. The distinction between a veteran and a military-retiree veteran is important because funding and responsibility for health care is different for each. Anyone who serves in the military fewer than 20 years is a veteran, and is supported by the Veterans Administration. Anyone who makes a career of the military and retires after 20 or more years of service is a military-retiree veteran, and is supported by the Department of Defense budget/funding. Several years ago, a law was passed that transferred funding for military retiree veterans to the Treasury Department. For some reason, this transfer never occurred. DOD continues to complain they cannot buy enough guns, bullets, etc. because of funding military-retiree veterans health care — which they really don't have to do. According to the Air Force Sergeants' Association Newsletter: "Last year, (DOD) sought, but failed to get approval to double or triple the cost of Tricare Prime, establish a Tricare Standard annual enrollment fee, increase the annual Tricare deductibles, and increase the cost to beneficiaries for prescriptions. In other words, last year's primary target was military retirees, survivors and their family members who were not yet eligible for Medicare and, therefore, Tricare for Life." Fortunately, this was prohibited. The newsletter noted, "It's incredible that this nation's leaders do not feel that a full career of serving at mortal risk and unlimited liability should warrant a paid health care benefit." Military retirees have been fighting for what was promised to us for years. Last year, we had several hundred representatives openly state in faxes and e-mail that they'd co-sponsor several bills. Yet these bills remained in House committees for the entire year. Not one representative was bold enough to get them on the floor for discussion and vote. Many promises have been made to the current military active-duty generation, and unless they get something in writing, they'll probably face the same kind of fights with Congress we have. RS from Tampa Bay Dear RS: According to the Military Retiree Grass Roots Group (mrgrg-ms.org/swindle00.html), there are 1.8 million military retirees and dependents who weren't expecting to pay for TRICARE benefits or Medicare. Many WWII and Korean War service personnel were promised this: "A member or former member of a uniformed service who is entitled to retired or retainer pay, or equivalent pay shall, upon request, be given medical and dental care in any facility of any uniformed service." In 1956, Congress changed Title 10, Subtitle A, Part II, Chapter 55, Section 1074 (b) of the U.S. Code in two ways. "Shall" became "may," and a critical caveat was added: "subject to the availability of space and facilities and the capabilities of the medical and dental staff." MRGRG suggests these changes allowed the closure of 58 military medical facilities; 26 states have no major military hospital. Because facilities aren't available, the caveat means no treatment has to be provided. Furthermore, MRGRG is concerned that promises of lifelong "superb" health care are still made despite the fine print "subject to the availability of space and facilities." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Send your questions/comments to María Félix-Ortiz, 4301 Broadway, Box 355, San Antonio, TX 78209 or e-mail mfelixortiz@gmail.com. This column runs Wednesdays. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Online at: http://www.mysanantonio.com/salife/columni...iz.105ee7c.html -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ADVICE: Increased demand calls for upgraded veterans' health facilities (November 14, 2007) María Félix-Ortiz, Ph.D San Antonio Express-News (TX) S.A. Life Page 09G (557 Words) I had the chance to speak to some veterans recently, and despite their different ages and politics, they did agree on one thing: the Department of Veterans Affairs health facilities need to be dramatically expanded. The problem isn't usually quality of care, though some will complain that this is an issue, too. Many in the medical community and veterans recognize the high quality of emergency care, and initial treatment that's available through the VA system. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages "Keep on, Keepin' on" Dan Cedusky, Champaign IL "Colonel Dan" See my web site at: http://www.angelfire.com/il2/VeteranIssues/

fwd from: Mike Harris Alright Marines.....front and center...! This USMC Tribute will charge you up. I'm placing several former Army, Navy, Air Force and Coast Guard personnel as well as some civilians as Blind Copies on this email. They will all be applauding you so listen up closely. You have many reasons to be proud: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3f3i1_nm...on-theater-film God Bless, Mike

Recent VA News Releases To view and download VA news release, please visit the following Internet address: http://www.va.gov/opa/pressrel Pay in Vets' Work Program Ruled Tax-Free Ruling on Compensated Work Therapy Retroactive Three Years WASHINGTON (January 7, 2008) -- Payments provided to veterans under two specific programs of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) -- the Compensated Work Therapy (CWT) and Incentive Therapy (IT) programs -- are no longer taxable, according to the Internal Revenue Service. Veterans who paid tax on these benefits in the past three years can claim refunds. Recipients of CWT and IT payments no longer receive a Form 1099 (Miscellaneous Income) from VA. Veterans who paid tax on these benefits in tax years 2004, 2005 or 2006 can claim a refund by filing an amended tax return using IRS Form 1040X. Nearly 19,000 veterans received CWT benefits last year, while 8,500 received IT benefits. The IRS agreed with a U.S. Tax Court decision earlier in 2007 that CWT payments are tax-free veterans benefits. In so doing, the agency reversed a 1965 ruling that these payments were taxable and required VA to report payments as taxable income. The CWT and IT programs provide assistance to veterans unable to work and support themselves. Under the CWT program, VA contracts with private industry and the public sector for work by veterans, who learn new job skills, strengthen successful work habits and regain a sense of self-esteem and self-worth. Veterans are compensated by VA for their work and, in turn, improve their economic and social well-being. Under the IT program, seriously disabled veterans receive payments for providing services at about 70 VA medical centers. To unsubscribe from this list, or to update your name or e-mail address, please visit the following Internet address: <http://www.va.gov/opa/pressrel/opalist_listserv.cfm>

fwd from Colonel Dan Handbook outlines benefits, bureaucracy for wounded vets By Karen Jowers - kjowers@militarytimes.com Posted : January 14, 2008 http://www.armytimes.com/issues/stories/0-...PER-3281855.php A new handbook designed to help wounded warriors and their families navigate the bureaucracy to get the benefits they have earned is now available. The 149-page “A Handbook for Injured Service Members and Their Families” was prepared free by a New York-based law firm for two nonprofit charities — the Wounded Warrior Project and the Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund. It can be downloaded for free at http://www.woundedwarriorproject.org and http://www.fallenheroesfund.org/. “This answers the questions you have,” said Army Spc. James O’Leary, who received multiple injuries in a mortar attack in Iraq in 2004. “I didn’t know what I was eligible for. I didn’t know about the vocational rehabilitation program, which is much better than the GI Bill and pays for all your tuition and books. I didn’t know about the evaluation system. I figured if [the Veterans Affairs Department] gave me a certain rating, that’s what I would be eligible for.” Davis Polk & Wardell donated about $500,000 worth of time, with hundreds of attorneys combing through government laws, regulations and other information, said Bill White, president of the Intrepid Foundation, which operates the Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund. “They tried to simplify and put the information in layman’s terms, so that if you’re 19 years old and haven’t gone to law school, ... you can understand it,” White said, adding that the senior lead partner on the project is a retired Marine. The handbook is divided into sections dealing with issues that come up during the process wounded service members go through, said Jeremy Chwat, vice president for policy and public affairs for the Wounded Warrior Project. “We wanted to make sure service members understand their benefits and rights and that it’s not lost in legislative speak,” Chwat said. Chapters include “Immediate Concerns,” with details on important documents, financial aid sources and information on service members’ continuing salaries. For families traveling to be at their service member’s bedside, information is included about the military’s invitational travel orders, per diem rates for family members, and a listing of contacts for all Fisher House homes. Extensive information about the disability evaluation systems, education and employment benefits, health benefits, legal rights and legal assistance, and other federal benefits is provided. The handbook has a glossary and a state-by-state list of resources for the wounded. Other resources are sprinkled throughout, such as Disabled American Veterans and the Army’s Wounded Soldier and Family Hotline. __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages "Keep on, Keepin' on" Dan Cedusky, Champaign IL "Colonel Dan" See my web site at: http://www.angelfire.com/il2/VeteranIssues/

fwd from Colonel Dan Helping injured troops get trauma injury pay By Tom Philpott, Special to Stars and Stripes Pacific edition, Saturday, January 5, 2007 http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section...mp;archive=true Too many severely injured troops and their families haven’t been getting the bedside help they need in preparing applications to qualify for up to $100,000 in traumatic injury insurance. But that is going to change, says Army Col. John Sackett. Sackett heads the Traumatic Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (TSGLI) branch within the U.S. Army Human Resources Command in Alexandria, Va. More than 6,600 claims for TSGLI have been filed by wounded or injured soldiers since the program began Dec. 1, 2005. But only 2,700 Army claims, about 40 percent of the total, have been approved. Many more wounded members from all services would be found eligible for TSGLI if servicemembers, family caregivers and especially medical staff were better informed on the kind of detailed documentation TSGLI requires, Sackett said. To increase their knowledge, and boost the number of claims approved, the Army is assigning Soldier Family Support Specialists to 10 military treatment facilities critical in the treatment of trauma patients. These specialists already are deployed and holding TSGLI training sessions at a number of military medical facilities, and more of these counselors are being trained to deploy soon. Every member covered by Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance also pays an extra $1 a month for traumatic injury protection. TSGLI pays $25,000 increments, up to $100,000, to help severely injured members and families handle the extra expense and the strain of adjusting to life-altering injuries. The Department of Veterans Affairs, which administers TSGLI, lists 44 types of losses that can qualify a member for payment. Conditions not difficult to document involve the loss of body parts or bodily functions, severe burns, or severe brain and spinal chord injuries. A far bigger and more complex problem in preparing TSGLI claims, however, involves members who suffer severe wounds to limbs that are saved or have mild traumatic brain injury. The trauma can leave them dependent on others to perform “activities of daily living” for extended periods. If unable to independently perform two or more of these activities for 30 days, the member will qualify for $25,000 in TSGLI. If debilitated in this way for 120 days would qualify for the maximum award of $100,000. Of nearly 3,700 Army TSGLI claims rejected by the VA, about 90 percent involve claims of members’ lost ability to perform activities of daily living. Sackett said they are being rejected because caregivers aren’t documenting what VA needs to see to prove loss of ability to perform activities. “The way to resolve this is to put boots on the ground, so to speak, to help the individuals get the necessary documentation they need at the military treatment facility,” Sackett said. In recent months the VA has relaxed the degree of debilitation that needs to be documented. It used to require evidence that members were “completely dependent” on others for two or more activities of daily living for 30 to 120 days. Now caregivers need only show that members were unable to “independently perform” these activities for the required periods of time. From this change alone, said Christian Harris, program managers for the Army TSGLI outreach program, claim approval rates are starting to rise. “We [also] are working with VA to try to adjust program guidance to include a wider array of debilitating injuries,” Harris said. Wounded servicemembers and their families also need to understand how early application for TSGLI can cut off their eligibility for Combat Injury Pay and thus lower a member’s total compensation over time, Sackett said. A year ago Congress decided it was unfair that servicemembers wounded in a war saw hostile fire pay, imminent danger pay and hazardous duty pay end within a month of being evacuated. So since March 23, 2006, medical evacuees have been able to draw Combat Injury Pay which replaces war zone pays that stop during hospitalization or rehabilitation. CIP can total $430 a month. But wounded servicemembers should be aware that CIP ends when a member is awarded TSGLI. Those facing long periods of convalescence could be denying themselves almost $5,200 a year if they apply too early for TSGLI, Sackett said. TSGLI specialists will include this in their briefings. To comment, e-mail milupdate@aol.com, write to Military Update, P.O. Box 231111, Centreville, VA, 20120-1111 or visit: www.militaryupdate.com. __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages "Keep on, Keepin' on" Dan Cedusky, Champaign IL "Colonel Dan" See my web site at: http://www.angelfire.com/il2/VeteranIssues/

fwd from: Mike Hello All, I just noticed the wrong time was listed on my last email: >> * 5:30 to 7:00 pm eastern time Every Wednesday The actual broadcast time is: 6:30 to 8:00 PM Eastern Time. Sorry... Warm Regards, Mike Harris Business: http://www.legaciesofhonor.com Personal: http://www.riverinesailor.com Webmaster: http://www.mrfa.org Webmaster: http://www.pointman101.org

Sounds like something Buyers & Nicholson came up with.

fwd from: Gene Simes Best way to get your letters read is by FAX. If you wish to fax or call the White House and add your voice to OFFE’s efforts to block this legislation, do it today! White House phone number: 202 456-1414 Fax number: 202 456-2461 Capitol Toll Free number: 1866 272-6622 and ask the operator for your U.S. Representatives. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE (21) January 8, 2008 OFFE Strongly Opposes H.R. 2640 According to Operation Firing For Effect (OFFE), National Chairman, Gene Simes; “if President Bush signs H.R. 2640 (aka: ‘The Veterans Disarmament Act’) into law, former military personnel of this country and their families will indeed suffer in the long run”. It is true that House Bill 2640 doesn’t directly mention veterans or military personnel in the text body. And there are no references to the Department of Veterans Affairs within the bill itself. However, passage of the bill will further open the door to accessing veteran’s personal (Department of Veterans Affairs) medical information to agencies outside the VA. The Department of Justice, FBI, ATF, Homeland Security, and many other law enforcement agencies are currently downloading information from the VA on veterans who ‘the VA’ has determined to be mentally incompetent and therefore at risk to buy or own a firearm. Yet, unbeknown to many, this practice has been going on for years. According to a in-house Veterans Benefits Administration memo (VBA Fast Letter 00-44) [below], agencies outside the Department of Veterans Affairs have been granted access to the personal medical and mental health information on thousands of veterans that fall into 1 of 7 categories defined by the ATF as ‘at risk’ to own a firearm. Sponsors of the 2007 H.R. 2640, NICS improvement bill include Reps. John Dingell (the only current House member who voted against the Gun Control Act of 1968), Lamar Smith (R-TX) and Rick Boucher (D-VA.)--all of whom are longtime supporters of gun owners’ rights and sponsors of many pro-Second Amendment bills. H.R.2640 has received the approval and endorsement of the National Rifle Association (NRA) and several high-profile veterans’ service organizations. A very polished NRA statement of endorsement can be found at this link: http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/Read...6&issue=018 Gene Simes and many OFFE supporters nationwide disagree strongly with the NRA statement and claim that the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) document [below] makes it very clear that the Department of Veterans Affairs has now become an active ‘arm of the law’. In the VBA Fast Letter dated June 2000, the VBA openly admits tens of thousands of veterans have had their personal mental health information transferred to NICS in the year 1999 alone. The document also substantiates the existence of a very open-door policy between the VA and federal law enforcement agencies when it comes to acquiring personal information for the purpose of gun control. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has its own jurisdiction of laws and responsibilities, as specified by USC, Title 38. No where in USC Title 38 does it state that the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs shall relinquish bulk medical information to another agency for the purpose of law enforcement or gun control. The VA has an ethical and moral responsibility to our veterans to protect their personal medical and mental health records from being used by anyone against them. The Department of Veterans Affairs must maintain a ‘sanctuary attitude’ and ‘non-adversarial posture’ if they expect a sick or ill veteran to trust in the VA in their time of need. If the veteran feels that by going to a VA for treatment might somehow adversely affect their Constitutional Rights to own a firearm, or put them on a nationwide database not directly related to the VA, they will avoid treatment. The current co-operation between the VA and NICS is very damning to the primary mission of the VA, to care for him whom bourn the battle... NICS infiltration of the VA database was a bad idea in 1999, and it is still a bad idea today. The Department of Veterans Affairs had no legitimate authority to give away, in their own words; “a load of data on incompetent veterans, surviving spouses, adult helpless children and dependent parents from information in the Benefits Delivery Network (BDN) and the Fiduciary Beneficiary System (FBS)”. If you, like me, are asking yourself what amount of ‘data’ would qualify as ‘a load’? I’m afraid I can’t tell you that. How many bits and bites of data can you put into a pickup truck? H.R.2640 of 2007 only enhances the NICA process that was started in 1999. Over the past 10 years, all of our veterans (at one point or another) have had their personal and medical data lost, stolen or compromised directly/indirectly from VA computers and VBA databases. Data containing personal information on millions of veterans has already been compromised, and since you can’t un-ring a bell, the damage is already done. Many agencies at both federal and state levels have been downloading privileged personal information from the national VA database for several years now. The Internal Revenue Service and Social Security Administration have absorbed and utilize massive amounts of data taken from the VA patient database. The Department of Justice is merely the latest to take their turn at the well. The Veterans Administration is the nation’s largest healthcare delivery system and medical database. This single collection of patient information has proven to be extremely valuable to databases maintained by homeland security, law enforcement, pharmaceutical marketing, insurance companies, special interest, and certain target demographics. There have always been legal avenues for Judges and law enforcement to subpoena medical records from the VA on any particular veteran to determine an individual’s mental competence. There was never a legitimate reason for the VA to voluntarily release bulk private information on hundreds of thousands of veterans without due cause, or due process of law. Some critics claim H.R. 2640 and the ‘VA connection’ have violated the Constitutional Protection of our nation’s veteran population as a whole, and question if civil liberties were being jeopardized as well. Some veterans question if Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) patient privacy protection guidelines were followed in accessing the initial 88,000+ personal medical records released in 1999 by the VA, or were the records all just sent over to NICS from the VA in a bundle of data, which is now being used to enforce gun laws and to build a nationwide database for law enforcement. Gene Simes and the OFFE team are disappointed and baffled by the NRA’s blanket endorsement of a policy that uses personal medical and mental health information collected by the Department of Veterans Affairs for purposes other than the medical treatment of our veterans. It appears that the veterans have been betrayed once again by the very agencies and organizations created to serve and protect them. Chairman Simes points out that NICS stands for National Instant ‘CRIMINAL’ Background check, not National Instant Criminal and Mental Health Background Check. The current NICS policy has boldly expanded its jurisdiction by definition to include and incorporate the term ‘mental health’, which is a ‘medical term’, not a ‘criminal term’. To group these two very different groups into one is very unfair to the veteran population, as many veterans carry emotional and psychological baggage and may very well become mentally incompetent to care for themselves before they die, yet they are not criminals. They still maintain ALL of their Constitutional Rights. So, to summarize; NICS has been collecting and compiling personal information on all Americans for years, veterans are merely the first nationwide group to be targeted as a mental health demographic. The ongoing NICS collection of mental health information compiled by the VA will only further alienate veterans from utilizing the VA healthcare system. Most experts agree that it is this ‘group’, the veterans currently enrolled in the Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare system that will be the foundation on which a nationwide healthcare system is to be modeled. The NICS national database is not in the business of providing healthcare for our nation’s veterans; their only concern is with the law enforcement and gun control aspects of the data they acquire. Although only one of seven ATF categories has been implicated thus far, ‘incompetent veterans’, the ramifications and potential for abuse in the future is extensive. How long before the veteran’s database includes one or more of the remaining six ATF categories for denying ownership of a firearm? Have you ever visited a VA hospital and heard the following questions? “Do you have thoughts of hurting yourself or others?”, “Do you own a firearm?” Your answers to these questions become a permanent part of your electronic fingerprint of your personal medical and mental health records database, forever etched in cyber-hell for all of eternity. Veterans will be less likely to honestly answer such leading questions in the future for fear of having their answers used against them by law enforcement agencies. It should be noted that even if a veteran wins an appeal of a NICS denial decision and is found to have made it on the NICS list by mistake, his or her name will never be removed from the NICS database. It is also of interest that the VBA Fast Letter has outlined very specific instructions for the destruction and disposal of any/all evidence concerning any individual NICS case or claim that the VA may be involved with. It is only by the Grace of God that OFFE has acquired this single VBA document to verify the partnership the VA has entered into with NICS, and it is a miracle this VBA document itself wasn’t shredded as instructed. That would make it damn hard to prove that your 2nd Amendment Rights had been violated, and easier for the government to make it extremely difficult for a veteran to buy or own a firearm. That my friends is the can of worms called NICS Improvement Bill of 2007, H.R. 2640. And that is how the Bill got the nickname; ‘The Veterans Disarmament Act’. H.R. 2640 was passed by the Senate on December 19, 2007 and is currently awaiting the President’s signature before becoming law. Operation Firing For Effect is urging President Bush to stand firm for the protection of personal ‘medical’ and ‘mental health’ data collected by the Department of Veterans Affairs and Veto this gun control Bill! Even our mentally ill, incompetent, and sickest of the sick military veterans have earned Constitutional Rights worth fighting for! Your immediate action is needed to block this Bill! The new ‘Keyword’ for the twenty-first century is; ‘DATA’ - The government agency that captures, manages, and maintains the largest amount of raw personnel data will be empowered with the knowledge to control, regulate, manipulate, and/or alter the behavior of the data harvested from that very same database. Welcome to your nightmare! If you wish to call the White House and add your voice to OFFE’s efforts to block this legislation call, 1-866-272-6622. Call immediately! To directly contact the NRA with your opinion of this issue, ila-contact@nrahq.org or call 1-800-392-8683. OFFE would like to hear from you concerning this story. Send your comments to; jerebeery@aol.com Jere Beery OFFE Public Relations Director June 2, 2000 In Reply Refer To: 212 Fast Letter 00-44 Director (00/21)All VBA Regional Offices and Centers SUBJ: National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Process Background: The Brady Handgun Violence Protection Act (Brady Act) of 1993 established the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). When drafting the regulations for NICS, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) defined the seven categories of individuals prohibited from purchasing or redeeming firearms. ATF incorporated the VA definition of incompetent "because of injury or disease lack the mental capacity to contract or manage their own affairs" into the category of those adjudicated as a mental defective. The Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA), through a Memorandum of Understanding with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), is providing the FBI with information on veterans rated as incompetent, incompetent surviving spouses, adult helpless children and dependent parents. Licensed gun dealers are required to check the NICS system to see if an individual is in a prohibited category before transferring a firearm to that individual.What VBA has Done: In November 1999, VBA provided NICS with an initial load of data on incompetent veterans, surviving spouses, adult helpless children and dependent parents from information in the Benefits Delivery Network (BDN) and the Fiduciary Beneficiary System (FBS). This consisted of data on 88,898 beneficiaries which were loaded into the NICS index. Rights of Denied Firearms Purchasers: If a veteran or beneficiary is denied the right to purchase or redeem a firearm, he or she may request the reason for the denial from the agency that conducted the check of the NICS data. If that individual wishes to challenge the accuracy of the record upon which the denial was based or if he or she wishes to assert that his or her rights to possess a firearm have been restored, he or she must appeal to the denying agency, i.e. the FBI or state or local law enforcement agency. If the denying agency is unable to resolve the appeal, the denying agency will inform the individual of the reason for the denial, as well as the name and address of the agency that provided the information upon which the denial was based. If the denial was based on a VA rating or court order of incompetency and the individual denied writes to the VA Central Office VBA Contact Point requesting a correction of the record, the request will be forwarded to the regional office with jurisdiction over the claims file. If the denial of the purchase or redemption of a firearm was because the individual was rated as incompetent by VA or because of a court order, under the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a, he or she has the right to request a correction or amendment of his or her records if the incompetency finding is found not to have been correct. If the regional office determines that the incompetency determination was correct and the records cannot be amended, the claimant must be informed by the regional office that he or she has the right to appeal the decision not to amend the records by writing to the General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20420. If the beneficiary has not been rated or determined to be incompetent, he or she should be so informed. Also, the appropriate centralized VBA NICS contact point (See paragraph 9 below) should be informed of that information by telephone or e-mail so that the information may be passed on to the FBI NICS office.How Data Quality is Determined: For quality assurance purposes, NICS is requesting a quarterly review of a sampling of approximately 100 cases to confirm the determination of incompetency, as well as the beneficiaries’ Social Security number and date of birth. From the initial load of data, they requested a review of 107 cases. This review was completed by employees at 44 regional offices and the incompetency finding was found to be appropriate in all cases. However, a number of cases were found in which the veterans’ or beneficiaries’ names were incorrectly spelled or required a full first name, middle initial, or suffix, such as Jr. A number of other cases required the provision or correction of the beneficiaries’ Social Security number or date of birth. The next review is due in June 2000. A special review by FBI personnel of 200 claims folders will also occur this year in Washington.What You Need to Know for this Program: Under the law, we are to routinely provide updated information on "new" incompetents. If an individual previously rated incompetent has their competency restored, under the law they are still permanently restricted from purchasing or redeeming a firearm and information concerning that individual will not be stricken from the NICS index. We are now developing procedures for providing NICS with data on veterans and beneficiaries that have been determined to be incompetent since November 1999 and for periodic future updates.Non-Retention of Records Related to NICS Background Checks: The NICS law prohibits the retention of records as to inquiries on potential firearms purchasers. Do not retain any information related to a NICS background check for reference or backup purposes. Do not create a memorandum for file or contact report. Information that may not be maintained and must be destroyed includes but is not limited to: all inquiry and response messages relating to the initiation and result of a NICS background check, all records relating to the individual or the transfer created as a result of a NICS background check, notes, system records, hard drives, disks, letters, personal logs, etc. Questions: Questions should be directed to the contact listed on the appropriate Calendar page at: vbaw.vba.va.gov/bl/21/calendar/index.htm Rescission: This letter is rescinded effective June 1, 2001. /s/ Robert J. Epley, Director FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE (21) January 8, 2008 OFFE Strongly Opposes H.R. 2640 According to Operation Firing For Effect (OFFE), National Chairman, Gene Simes; “if President Bush signs H.R. 2640 (aka: ‘The Veterans Disarmament Act’) into law, former military personnel of this country and their families will indeed suffer in the long run”. It is true that House Bill 2640 doesn’t directly mention veterans or military personnel in the text body. And there are no references to the Department of Veterans Affairs within the bill itself. However, passage of the bill will further open the door to accessing veteran’s personal (Department of Veterans Affairs) medical information to agencies outside the VA. The Department of Justice, FBI, ATF, Homeland Security, and many other law enforcement agencies are currently downloading information from the VA on veterans who ‘the VA’ has determined to be mentally incompetent and therefore at risk to buy or own a firearm. Yet, unbeknown to many, this practice has been going on for years. According to a in-house Veterans Benefits Administration memo (VBA Fast Letter 00-44) [below], agencies outside the Department of Veterans Affairs have been granted access to the personal medical and mental health information on thousands of veterans that fall into 1 of 7 categories defined by the ATF as ‘at risk’ to own a firearm. Sponsors of the 2007 H.R. 2640, NICS improvement bill include Reps. John Dingell (the only current House member who voted against the Gun Control Act of 1968), Lamar Smith (R-TX) and Rick Boucher (D-VA.)--all of whom are longtime supporters of gun owners’ rights and sponsors of many pro-Second Amendment bills. H.R.2640 has received the approval and endorsement of the National Rifle Association (NRA) and several high-profile veterans’ service organizations. A very polished NRA statement of endorsement can be found at this link: http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/Read...6&issue=018 Gene Simes and many OFFE supporters nationwide disagree strongly with the NRA statement and claim that the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) document [below] makes it very clear that the Department of Veterans Affairs has now become an active ‘arm of the law’. In the VBA Fast Letter dated June 2000, the VBA openly admits tens of thousands of veterans have had their personal mental health information transferred to NICS in the year 1999 alone. The document also substantiates the existence of a very open-door policy between the VA and federal law enforcement agencies when it comes to acquiring personal information for the purpose of gun control. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has its own jurisdiction of laws and responsibilities, as specified by USC, Title 38. No where in USC Title 38 does it state that the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs shall relinquish bulk medical information to another agency for the purpose of law enforcement or gun control. The VA has an ethical and moral responsibility to our veterans to protect their personal medical and mental health records from being used by anyone against them. The Department of Veterans Affairs must maintain a ‘sanctuary attitude’ and ‘non-adversarial posture’ if they expect a sick or ill veteran to trust in the VA in their time of need. If the veteran feels that by going to a VA for treatment might somehow adversely affect their Constitutional Rights to own a firearm, or put them on a nationwide database not directly related to the VA, they will avoid treatment. The current co-operation between the VA and NICS is very damning to the primary mission of the VA, to care for him whom bourn the battle... NICS infiltration of the VA database was a bad idea in 1999, and it is still a bad idea today. The Department of Veterans Affairs had no legitimate authority to give away, in their own words; “a load of data on incompetent veterans, surviving spouses, adult helpless children and dependent parents from information in the Benefits Delivery Network (BDN) and the Fiduciary Beneficiary System (FBS)”. If you, like me, are asking yourself what amount of ‘data’ would qualify as ‘a load’? I’m afraid I can’t tell you that. How many bits and bites of data can you put into a pickup truck? H.R.2640 of 2007 only enhances the NICA process that was started in 1999. Over the past 10 years, all of our veterans (at one point or another) have had their personal and medical data lost, stolen or compromised directly/indirectly from VA computers and VBA databases. Data containing personal information on millions of veterans has already been compromised, and since you can’t un-ring a bell, the damage is already done. Many agencies at both federal and state levels have been downloading privileged personal information from the national VA database for several years now. The Internal Revenue Service and Social Security Administration have absorbed and utilize massive amounts of data taken from the VA patient database. The Department of Justice is merely the latest to take their turn at the well. The Veterans Administration is the nation’s largest healthcare delivery system and medical database. This single collection of patient information has proven to be extremely valuable to databases maintained by homeland security, law enforcement, pharmaceutical marketing, insurance companies, special interest, and certain target demographics. There have always been legal avenues for Judges and law enforcement to subpoena medical records from the VA on any particular veteran to determine an individual’s mental competence. There was never a legitimate reason for the VA to voluntarily release bulk private information on hundreds of thousands of veterans without due cause, or due process of law. Some critics claim H.R. 2640 and the ‘VA connection’ have violated the Constitutional Protection of our nation’s veteran population as a whole, and question if civil liberties were being jeopardized as well. Some veterans question if Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) patient privacy protection guidelines were followed in accessing the initial 88,000+ personal medical records released in 1999 by the VA, or were the records all just sent over to NICS from the VA in a bundle of data, which is now being used to enforce gun laws and to build a nationwide database for law enforcement. Gene Simes and the OFFE team are disappointed and baffled by the NRA’s blanket endorsement of a policy that uses personal medical and mental health information collected by the Department of Veterans Affairs for purposes other than the medical treatment of our veterans. It appears that the veterans have been betrayed once again by the very agencies and organizations created to serve and protect them. Chairman Simes points out that NICS stands for National Instant ‘CRIMINAL’ Background check, not National Instant Criminal and Mental Health Background Check. The current NICS policy has boldly expanded its jurisdiction by definition to include and incorporate the term ‘mental health’, which is a ‘medical term’, not a ‘criminal term’. To group these two very different groups into one is very unfair to the veteran population, as many veterans carry emotional and psychological baggage and may very well become mentally incompetent to care for themselves before they die, yet they are not criminals. They still maintain ALL of their Constitutional Rights. So, to summarize; NICS has been collecting and compiling personal information on all Americans for years, veterans are merely the first nationwide group to be targeted as a mental health demographic. The ongoing NICS collection of mental health information compiled by the VA will only further alienate veterans from utilizing the VA healthcare system. Most experts agree that it is this ‘group’, the veterans currently enrolled in the Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare system that will be the foundation on which a nationwide healthcare system is to be modeled. The NICS national database is not in the business of providing healthcare for our nation’s veterans; their only concern is with the law enforcement and gun control aspects of the data they acquire. Although only one of seven ATF categories has been implicated thus far, ‘incompetent veterans’, the ramifications and potential for abuse in the future is extensive. How long before the veteran’s database includes one or more of the remaining six ATF categories for denying ownership of a firearm? Have you ever visited a VA hospital and heard the following questions? “Do you have thoughts of hurting yourself or others?”, “Do you own a firearm?” Your answers to these questions become a permanent part of your electronic fingerprint of your personal medical and mental health records database, forever etched in cyber-hell for all of eternity. Veterans will be less likely to honestly answer such leading questions in the future for fear of having their answers used against them by law enforcement agencies. It should be noted that even if a veteran wins an appeal of a NICS denial decision and is found to have made it on the NICS list by mistake, his or her name will never be removed from the NICS database. It is also of interest that the VBA Fast Letter has outlined very specific instructions for the destruction and disposal of any/all evidence concerning any individual NICS case or claim that the VA may be involved with. It is only by the Grace of God that OFFE has acquired this single VBA document to verify the partnership the VA has entered into with NICS, and it is a miracle this VBA document itself wasn’t shredded as instructed. That would make it damn hard to prove that your 2nd Amendment Rights had been violated, and easier for the government to make it extremely difficult for a veteran to buy or own a firearm. That my friends is the can of worms called NICS Improvement Bill of 2007, H.R. 2640. And that is how the Bill got the nickname; ‘The Veterans Disarmament Act’. H.R. 2640 was passed by the Senate on December 19, 2007 and is currently awaiting the President’s signature before becoming law. Operation Firing For Effect is urging President Bush to stand firm for the protection of personal ‘medical’ and ‘mental health’ data collected by the Department of Veterans Affairs and Veto this gun control Bill! Even our mentally ill, incompetent, and sickest of the sick military veterans have earned Constitutional Rights worth fighting for! Your immediate action is needed to block this Bill! The new ‘Keyword’ for the twenty-first century is; ‘DATA’ - The government agency that captures, manages, and maintains the largest amount of raw personnel data will be empowered with the knowledge to control, regulate, manipulate, and/or alter the behavior of the data harvested from that very same database. Welcome to your nightmare! If you wish to call the White House and add your voice to OFFE’s efforts to block this legislation call, 1-866-272-6622. Call immediately! To directly contact the NRA with your opinion of this issue, ila-contact@nrahq.org or call 1-800-392-8683. OFFE would like to hear from you concerning this story. Send your comments to; jerebeery@aol.com Jere Beery OFFE Public Relations Director June 2, 2000 In Reply Refer To: 212 Fast Letter 00-44 Director (00/21)All VBA Regional Offices and Centers SUBJ: National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Process Background: The Brady Handgun Violence Protection Act (Brady Act) of 1993 established the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). When drafting the regulations for NICS, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) defined the seven categories of individuals prohibited from purchasing or redeeming firearms. ATF incorporated the VA definition of incompetent "because of injury or disease lack the mental capacity to contract or manage their own affairs" into the category of those adjudicated as a mental defective. The Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA), through a Memorandum of Understanding with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), is providing the FBI with information on veterans rated as incompetent, incompetent surviving spouses, adult helpless children and dependent parents. Licensed gun dealers are required to check the NICS system to see if an individual is in a prohibited category before transferring a firearm to that individual.What VBA has Done: In November 1999, VBA provided NICS with an initial load of data on incompetent veterans, surviving spouses, adult helpless children and dependent parents from information in the Benefits Delivery Network (BDN) and the Fiduciary Beneficiary System (FBS). This consisted of data on 88,898 beneficiaries which were loaded into the NICS index. Rights of Denied Firearms Purchasers: If a veteran or beneficiary is denied the right to purchase or redeem a firearm, he or she may request the reason for the denial from the agency that conducted the check of the NICS data. If that individual wishes to challenge the accuracy of the record upon which the denial was based or if he or she wishes to assert that his or her rights to possess a firearm have been restored, he or she must appeal to the denying agency, i.e. the FBI or state or local law enforcement agency. If the denying agency is unable to resolve the appeal, the denying agency will inform the individual of the reason for the denial, as well as the name and address of the agency that provided the information upon which the denial was based. If the denial was based on a VA rating or court order of incompetency and the individual denied writes to the VA Central Office VBA Contact Point requesting a correction of the record, the request will be forwarded to the regional office with jurisdiction over the claims file. If the denial of the purchase or redemption of a firearm was because the individual was rated as incompetent by VA or because of a court order, under the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a, he or she has the right to request a correction or amendment of his or her records if the incompetency finding is found not to have been correct. If the regional office determines that the incompetency determination was correct and the records cannot be amended, the claimant must be informed by the regional office that he or she has the right to appeal the decision not to amend the records by writing to the General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20420. If the beneficiary has not been rated or determined to be incompetent, he or she should be so informed. Also, the appropriate centralized VBA NICS contact point (See paragraph 9 below) should be informed of that information by telephone or e-mail so that the information may be passed on to the FBI NICS office.How Data Quality is Determined: For quality assurance purposes, NICS is requesting a quarterly review of a sampling of approximately 100 cases to confirm the determination of incompetency, as well as the beneficiaries’ Social Security number and date of birth. From the initial load of data, they requested a review of 107 cases. This review was completed by employees at 44 regional offices and the incompetency finding was found to be appropriate in all cases. However, a number of cases were found in which the veterans’ or beneficiaries’ names were incorrectly spelled or required a full first name, middle initial, or suffix, such as Jr. A number of other cases required the provision or correction of the beneficiaries’ Social Security number or date of birth. The next review is due in June 2000. A special review by FBI personnel of 200 claims folders will also occur this year in Washington.What You Need to Know for this Program: Under the law, we are to routinely provide updated information on "new" incompetents. If an individual previously rated incompetent has their competency restored, under the law they are still permanently restricted from purchasing or redeeming a firearm and information concerning that individual will not be stricken from the NICS index. We are now developing procedures for providing NICS with data on veterans and beneficiaries that have been determined to be incompetent since November 1999 and for periodic future updates.Non-Retention of Records Related to NICS Background Checks: The NICS law prohibits the retention of records as to inquiries on potential firearms purchasers. Do not retain any information related to a NICS background check for reference or backup purposes. Do not create a memorandum for file or contact report. Information that may not be maintained and must be destroyed includes but is not limited to: all inquiry and response messages relating to the initiation and result of a NICS background check, all records relating to the individual or the transfer created as a result of a NICS background check, notes, system records, hard drives, disks, letters, personal logs, etc. Questions: Questions should be directed to the contact listed on the appropriate Calendar page at: vbaw.vba.va.gov/bl/21/calendar/index.htm Rescission: This letter is rescinded effective June 1, 2001. /s/ Robert J. Epley, Director

Congratulations Betrayed! >Its been a long hard road, and its not over there are still about 4 issues out there. Hang in there. It's almost over. Allan

Hello Jim, welcome to hadit.com! in addition to the good advice Berta gives. I would like to add that I found it difficult living in a rural area to find a specialist that would follow the VA's guidelines. Several thought I was trying to do something illegal by requesting an IMO. The VA will generally use an internal medicine MD for examinations and opinions. They often use paid medical consultants they have on staff at the VAMC or a local medical consultant. I tried to go through local universities for someone who specialized in spinal disorders like DDD, DJD and neumuscular disorders. Logged on hadit one day and read this discussion about a specialist in Washington DC that provides an evaluation of your records and an IMO. His name was Dr Craig Bash. My claim is still pending, but Dr Bash's therough evaluation of my medical records and IMO will win my claim one of these days. You can save yourself a great deal of time by seeking an IMO from Dr Bash. There are others, but the main thing is you need to get one the DVA can't get around. Dr Bash is also a court certified MD. He often privides medical opinions for the Board and Court of veterans appeals. He's one of the best in the country in my opinion. Good luck. It's a hard road to travel. Allan **************************************************************** Hi all, I'm new to this board. I have found that I don't know as much as I thought about this process ... I had a C&P exam last year for DDD rating upgrade. The doc apparently did not go by the 'checklist', as a lot of things on the checklist did not occur at my C&P exam. When I do my appeal, can I request a different doctor than the one I had last time? If I use a civilian doctor in advance of the appeal, should I take the checklist with me and have him/her fill it out for me? I'm not really sure what direction to go here, any advice is appreciated. Thanks, --Jim

>In my heart I felt that this guy was working for the best interest of the VA and not me. Hello Windycity, I would follow your gut feeling. I'm not saying it happens, but I've often wondered if theres a $$$ kickback within the system. If they can't talk you out of the meeting, they will try to talk you into an "informal" hearing. Informal hearings are not recorded and no testament or evidence is submitted into the record under oath. A local hearing can be requested anytime you have a need to. I would request another hearing in writing stating the cancellation was in error. We all make mistakes. Because you canceled one hearing, doesn't forbid you from requesting another. You do not have to have your DAV SO present, but I would take a witness. hope this helps................Allan