Jay Johnson

HAHA, now I'm a "hippie thinking leftist xxxxxx xxx", that's caused the decline of america:-) How big is your compound in idaho anyway? LoL. I always find it amusing when you don't agree with hard-liners (be it left or right), you are always the reason why america is horrible, but if you complain about america (the one they think you made horrible) you are a left wing hippie or a right wing nazi. My opinions, unlike yours, are based on a very large volume of research done on the topic. I have in no way advocated being soft on criminals, nor have I said we should be nice to rapists; rather, I pointed out that the current system is not dealing with them properly. Even in states with large mandatory sentences for first time sex offenders (some states already have 15yr min on the books) there is NO improvement in the rate in which rapes are committed. You see, people like you HATE facts, because they do not often conform to your ideology, which makes them wrong and anyone who believes them "liberal hippies". How many people on this board believe that adding the death penalty with reduce rapes? Bet most would, just as most believe the death penalty for murder will stop murder and other violent crimes.....well, the truth is that we are one of the only industrial nations left on earth with capital punishment and we are, by far, the most violent nation on earth. You see, that fact doesn't conform with your way of thinking (based only on your perceptions and not a shred of evidence), so you hate it, choose not to believe it and call anyone who does believe it a liberal xxxxxx xxx. But, you are who you are and NOTHING will change a person like you, so I leave you with this - Prove that ANYTHING I said in this, or any other thread, is wrong via some actual proof beyond your own assertions and I will concede the argument an declare you my own personal god.

As was addressed in another thread, you cannot impose super long jail terms for people who commit rapes. It is in the violent crimes category and the punishment has to fit the crime (you may believe they should be put to death, jailed forever, etc, but you would have to trash our constitution if you did). It's a VERY difficult situation and requires some unconventional thinking in order to attempt to fix it. The biggest problem with rape is the ignorance that 99% of americans still suffer from in regards to the facts behind rape (very evident in this thread). Only about 2% of rapes end up in jail time for the offenders, so what would an island, a long jail term, taking away ED pills, etc due to really help the problem? You may prevent 0.001% of rapes overall that way? Once people get it through their thick heads that rape is NOT sexual crime (IE - ED pills mean NOTHING in the grander scheme of things) and that the person who is going to rape your child/spouse is NOT going to be some scary guy with a criminal history, we may actually be able to start fixing the problem. If you want to find a rapist try looking in your house, or your neighbor's house, or your local church, or your kids school's faculty, etc.....one of those is about 90% more likely to rape a loved one then some convicted sex offender.

Honestly, getting angry about the VA prescribing ED meds to sex offenders is really just spreading propaganda that makes fixing the issue of rape impossible. Rape is not a SEXUAL act...it is either an emulation of a learned behavior (IE - the offender was molested as a child/teen) or it is an emulation of violent behavior (IE - kid was beaten and abused and feels an urge to act that violence out on others...or saw his/her father beat the mother regularly). My guess is that the ED meds are because the sexual predators have a hard time with NORMAL sex with their spouses and use the meds to "appear" normal....I bet not a single one uses it in the act of a crime.

PTSD treatment is very subjective...if he hasn't improved over the last 20yrs chances are he won't see much improvement over the next 20 yrs. If I were him I would first push for a 100% schedular and start getting all of the medical evidence he can. Also, start seeing a civilian specialist (someone who specializes in anxiety disorders like PTSD) and get some good info stating that work is making his condition worse (don't need to be unemployed if you can prove that part of the reason for your decline is working). Make sure you have a pretty solid case before filing though...it's always better to have to much info then not enough and put yourself in an uphill battle of appeals. P.S. - He could also check himself into a hospital or two if he feels that he's even remotely close to suicidal ideation......suicide and hospitalizations are a key component to a higher rating in my opinion.

It' hardly just a VA problem...a cop can get caught shooting or beating someone on camera and gets away with it 99% of the time. We have a problem with allowing people of authority to get away with murder in this country. We put people in power on a pedestal then we are shocked when we can't knock them off said pedestal. When we start teaching our kids that respect is something earned and not a title given to someone our country will be much better off. I think I'm one of the few parents in this world who tells their children NOT to get into to a car with a cop just as they shouldn't get into a car with a stranger...a cop is a human being and there is no greater or lesser likelihood of said cop raping or killing my child then any other human being. NEVER respect someone for what they do in life, respect them for how they act and what they say.....

I've worked in long-term care facilities and there is huge difference in level of care depending on your insurance/cash. The one I worked for did not accept insurance and was VERY high end. Costs for a private condo easily exceeded 100K a year and regular nursing care was much, much higher. But, the patience got gourmet meals, top notch care in a pristine and private setting. Honestly, if your family cannot take care of you, you cannot have enough long-term care insurance.

Yes and no:-) I think far too many psychiatrists have "agendas" and ignore the basic guidelines set forth by the people who started the new "GAF" system. I also believe that psych's try to prove that they have "cured" too many patients to make themselves feel useful, when there is really no hard evidence to suggest that any psych method can cure mental disease. A good example would be the docs in mental hospitals....every time my wife goes in she gets GAFs in the 10-20 range so they can justify admitting her (both to their superiors and the insurance company). Then, when the insurance company no longer wants to pay, my wife miraculously gets a GAF in the 40 range (which is almost a minimum to discharge someone). It's like the psychs won't admit that my wife is consistently in the 15-30 range, depending on her mood, because they MUST feel as if they are making her better (and, thus, worth the insane amount of money we pay them). In my opinion, psychiatry is still in the dark-ages of medicine at this point (especially america). Europe is a good deal ahead of us on the topic but still WAY behind where they need to be to actually help people.

I agree with what berta said with one exception - I'm not sure you can NOD any of the other disabilities unless the decisions were recent. Obviously, you need new and material evidence to reopen an existing claim if the NOD time has expired. It sounds like you are fairly safe in your current rating so NOD the recent decision and ask for P&T and SMC. If that comes back with a decision you disagree with then try and get some new evidence to suggest your other disabilities have gotten worse and open claims on each of them for P&T and SMC. Given your over-all condition, my guess is that the RO will grant at least P&T (at some point) and hope you go away...you could keep them VERY busy otherwise with minimal effort on your part.

Hmm, what, exactly, is your disability breakdown (IE - XX = 20%, XY = 30%, YY = 20%, etc)? If you have several disabilities that combine to 100% it's probably going to be tough for them to pick at any one of them if you NOD, but if you have one condition at 100%, they "could" go after it (though they are "supposed" to have new, material evidence to reopen a claim). Like many here, I hate to discourage people from NODing and getting what they deserve, but I think a common sense approach to it is ok (IE - how safe is the 100% and what do you gain by NODing and weighing the two). Also, depending on your disability breakdown you "could" qualify for housebound based on the 100% + 60% rule.

Well, part of what wally said was correct...there is no real such thing as P&T. Permanence can be given to any diagnosis that has been deemed chronic and static at any time. Total refers to one being "totally" disabled (IE - 100%). So, technically you already have the "T" in P&T, but you lack the "P". The problem with your claim is that you are assuming that if you get P&T (well "P" really) for your 30% claim that you will be permanent over-all....this is not true. The RO "could" grant you P&T over-all, but they would likely just make the 30% diagnosis permanent while keeping your 100% diagnosis as non-permanent. In other words, they are two different conditions that will be evaluated differently and just because one is permanent doesn't mean the other has to be. So, what really do you gain by getting permanence from the 30% rating? The part I am not sure of is whether or not permanence for a 30% rating would qualify you for Ch 35....my guess is that you require both permanence and total disability in order to qualify for Ch 35. Again, the term P&T is used by vets as a means to understand a given designation, but the VA, to my knowledge, doesn't use it officially. When you are deemed P&T your award merely says "your condition is permanent in nature and no longer requires a future examination" (or something to that effect); it does not say you are officially “permanent and total”. With that said, you can NOD and hope for the best. Perhaps the DRO will take a look at your "over-all" claim and grant P&T for the whole thing (and not just the 30% condition). Might be worth a try if you’re confident that they will not attempt to reduce your 100% (RO's are good at fishing trips to lower high ratings).

That is incorrect. P&T means no future examinations and qualifies you for Ch 35 benefits. You can be 100% and not be P&T, in fact, most are.

Not really worth NODing in my opinion. P&T is a fairly subjective thing on the raters part. Though you may want to ask for P&T on your 100% claim, NODing the 30% claim won't get you much. These are different things entirely and just because one is permanent don’t mean the other will be. In other words, even if you got P&T on the vision thing it wouldn't cover your 100% and you don't really gain anything from the 30% in the first place. Also, you cannot NOD P&T for your total disability picture because you have no "new and material" evidence to reopen the 100% claim (unless I'm reading this wrong and you were just granted both the 100% AND the 30% in the same decision).

Here you go - >>>>>>1.1. History of the GAF The Global Assessment of Functioning Scale (GAF) was introduced as a new rating scale of overall psychiatric disturbance as Axis V of the revised third edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM III-R, American Psychiatric Association, 1987). Since its introduction, its use in clinical settings has expanded due to the need for an easily and quickly administered measure of severity of mental illness. It is currently the most commonly used global assessment instrument for psychiatric patients (Bodlund, Kullgren, Ekselius, Lindstrom, & von Knorring, 1994; Piersma & Boes, 1997). The GAF is derived from its predecessor, the Global Assessment Scale (GAS; Endicott, Spitzer, & Fleiss, 1976), a measure used to assess a patient’s overall level of functioning for a specified time period (American Psychiatric Association, 1987). The GAF is based on the assumption that the level of current functioning in psychiatric populations holds crucial information for treatment planning and treatment outcome. Furthermore, the GAF can be used in a variety of settings to follow changes in an individual over time without the need or expense of extensive training. The GAF is similar to the GAS in that it has similar criteria and the same interval design, a value range from 0 (most severe) to 100 (least severe) with 10 anchor points at equal intervals (Hall, 1995). However, unlike the GAS, each interval of the GAF is accompanied by a behavioral descriptor ranging from “superior functioning in a wide range of activities…no symptoms” to “persistent danger of severely hurting self or others…persistent inability to maintain minimal personal hygiene.” Therefore, the interviewer must first determine the descriptor that summarizes the client’s current difficulties, and then indicate the severity of impairment within a nine-point range. However, the number of criteria required to meet a particular interval is not defined. Furthermore, the rater must make a single rating based upon the patient’s overall level of psychological, social, and occupational functioning. Additionally, impairment in functioning due to physical limitations or psychosocial stressors is not included in the GAF ratings. The absence of these stressors is cited as a major flaw by numerous researchers (Bodlund et. al., 1994; Hall, 1995, & Piersma et.al., 1997), who have suggested that one’s general medical condition may have a major impact upon one’s social and occupational functioning.<<<<<<<<<<<

What they are doing, in effect, is negating ANY COLA increase you get for the rest of your life. The extra amount we have to pay due to this mandatory medicare bill will not be covered by COLA for quite some time and they raise premiums EVERY year to coincide with COLA raises (for SSD). It was a very sneaky way to cut veteran pay overall imo (cutting via a premium raise rather then actual cuts looks much nicer on paper).

I'm not 100% sure, but I believe they, typically, schedule the next review from the date of the last review...in other words, if this is a recent application/decision then they will likely set your review from the date of the decision not the date at which the monetary award begins (some cases go back many years (5+) so it wouldn't make sense to award the money then order an immediate review because you had been receiving money. technically, for 5 years:-)

It's not a matter of who's right in this case; it's a matter of personal information, not relevant to this board, being posted on a public forum. Even if this person was correct, and I don't believe he/she was, it is terribly distasteful to air out one's grievances in open forum...those posts had no purpose other then to cause one of our members harm. I do not believe it will rise to the level of libel, but Tbird did do the right thing by removing it.

You need to get on this ASAP. Once you qualify for medicare you MUST take it as per the horrible new law passed in '05. What's worse is that tricare/medicare is very slow to recognize it and may catch the mistake at YOUR cost (IE - they decide tricare should not have been paying for your bills and you hadn't payed into medicare so they bill YOU..it happened to us). I guess for single people it may not be so bad because you're only paying about 500 more per year then you were previously (430/yr vs 900/yr to medicare), but for families, like mine, we still have to pay tricare 400/yr + 900/yr to medicare, for the wife. It was, in effect, a 300%+ raise on our healthcare with no net improvement in care:-( P.S. - Horrible, Horrible, Horrible law......

I'm a little shakey on the details and timeline of all this......is your PTSD service connected and, if so, what was the cause? Were you discharged as a direct result of this disability and was it a medical discharge as a result (if not why were you discharged officially)? Also, when were you discharged?... It's hard to help too much more without knowing these rather important details unforetunately:-(

In a time of a very controversial war, I'm willing to bet you can drum up media support if you word your story carefully. Basically, let it be known that you are out of the military and that you only want an honest job for honest pay, but the military/VA will not help you. Sounds like a media goldmine if you can get someone to publish it.

PM me with your info on what happened and when and I'll see what I can do (or suggest).

I find it both hillarious and sad that all disorders linked to the brain (the most complicated organ in our body by FAR) are all linked together, but there are probably 100 different diagnosis for "back pain", which is fairly simple by comparison. This is nothing more then typical stereotyping of mental disorders that has been going on in this country for decades.

It could just be a clerical error, but I doubt the 800 folks will haev any clue....you may want to walk into your VARO and try to straighten the situation out. If the doctor recommended you for an increase you may just want to play it out though (seeing as how he's only 10% and doesn't have much to lose really).

Unless something has changed recently, all mental disorders fall under "9440 Chronic adjustment disorder", with the exception of eating disorders ("9520 Anorexia nervosa & 9521 Bulimia nervosa"). Again, this is one of those discrimination things for mentally ill vets....you can have several different ratings for "arm pain", but they lump EVERY mental disorder into the "you're crazy" category.

On the plus side, once you get through all the SS red tape, they are FAR easier to deal with then the VA. Basically, the wife gets a letter every 3-5 yrs asking her if her condition has changed...she says no and they reward her 5 more years. If only the VA were so easy:-) P.S. - It's sad that the SS folks seem to think veterans are honest, but the VA assumes they are all lying crooks.

No, a doctor cannot put in a claim for an increase in benefits to my knowledge. Sounds like they may be trying to reopen the claim on new evidence so that, if you win your cue, they won't have to give you back-pay:-(