dav_marine72

Hi halos2, I put in for a secondary connection for hypertension due to my service connected back condition. Basically once I started being in pain my blood pressure went up. They denied me twice and then finally awarded it to me. I basically just had a nexus statement in my records. An outside doc said my hypertension was probably tied to the stress of being in pain all the time. That setup a secondary for a mental condition to my back also. Let me know if you have anymore questions.

Thanks Berta. Do you think it's a good idea for me to call and b*tch or should I let the SO do it?

Hells to the yeahs!!!! It's always right to appeal if you feel you should be service connected. Have you talked with a service officer from disabled American veterans (DAV) or American legion or anyone? When I first starting filing for service connections in 1996 I had applied for sc of both right and left foot injuries. They gave me right and not left sc. They told my DAV rep that they thought I only broke my right and not left foot. Once they actually looked closer they saw it was both right and left. That's the service we get!

Hey John, That is what I heard. The copy the American Legion SO signed off on said entitlement to chapter 35 benefits, my letter didn't, and then I went to the RO and they printed me a copy which showed the award of chapter 35 benefits. Then strangely the release of information I had filled out for the copy showed up at my mailbox a week later with a copy that did not have the award. How can they play this shit? I think based on the fact my rep signed off on a copy with chapter 35 and they gave me a copy I should win this crap. One difference is the letter that showed the chapter 35 award was dated September 16 and the one without September 18.

Hi Berta, It's Hartford, CT VARO. The System says I'm not P&T. Just to explain again there is two drafts of my award letter floating around. The original which had DEA included and the one I received which had DEA removed. The American Legion SO signed off on the DEA copy. I also went to the VARO and got the DEA copy from them. Now they are saying this is not the case.

Yes I have the copy he underlined stating I am entitled to DEA based on a P&T service connection. CHAMPVA I had just applied so they turned me down because the VARO did not put me P&T in their system.

Well just when you think you can stop stressing the VA makes you stress again. I'm not sure how many of you so my posts within the last month but here is the deal. My American legion rep goes up to the VARO and signs off on a September 16, 2009 decision granting a few things including TDIU and dependents educational assistance (DEA). Under the grant of DEA it states a Veteran is eligible for DEA when he or she is discharged under other than dishonorable conditions and has a permanent and total service connected disability. I receive a grant letter dated September 18, 2009 with all the above minus the DEA award. I call my SO and he says no your P&T. I go to the VARO in the next couple of days and ask for a copy of my latest rating decision. I get a copy of the September 16, 2009 decision showing the grant of DEA. However, the rep won't tell me if I am P&T. He says I can tell you is that you are TDIU and have DEA benefits and he underlined them. I go down to my American Legion rep and he says by establishing DEA they have rated you P&T and you are eligible for champva. The only way you can get DEA is though P&T. I said why doesn't it say P&T directly on the letter. He says this is how they have been awarded P&T now. They used to actually spell out P&T. Then since I filled out a release that day a few days later I get the September 18, 2009 rating decision again without the DEA. So I'm cool and happy and file my CHAMPVA application. Then I call this morning and find out its denied because they say I'm not P&T. I called my AL rep and leave a message. He tells me he went up to the RO and saw the September 18th decision without the DEA grant. However the code that was on the sheet he signed off on was P&T. He pleaded my case and we are waiting to hear back. WTF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hi Everyone, I filed for loss of use of a creative organ about six months ago based on the Zoloft I take and my service connected back and testicle issues. The VARO came back and denied it based on no nexus letter. Fair enough I'm going to the health center today to get the nexus letter my shrink is good to go with that stuff. Here is my question. I understand I didn't file for the SMC until six months ago but there have been many documents of it in my VA medical records. The VARO admitted this in their denial. My question is that I had a hearing with a DRO back in December 2004. The hearing was not for loss of a special organ or ed. However, when talking about my sc back and testicle the loss of use came up. Just to give you some background on my sexual dysfunctions I was diagnosed with OCD in the beginning of my mental treatment because I was addicted to masturbation based on trying to relieve my back and leg pains. By 2004 I was unable to masterbate because if I did I would be in extreme pain in my back and testicle. Here is the testimony. This part of the hearing was based on my going after service connection for a mental disorder which as granted by the DRO at a later date. Veteran: Yup. I was seeing them (VA shrink) for a whole bunch of issues, and one of them was off in the sexual realm. And I can't really ---I was talking with Dr. Va about this the other day, he said, well, how are you doing in that realm? And I said, Well, I don't have any problems with it because I can't do it. DRO: Right Veteran: Because one of the problems was chronic masturbation and it was all kinds of sexual type of stuff. I can't do anymore. DRO: Because of your back? Veteran: Yeah DRO: And your testicle --- Veteran: I do have sex DRO: pain? Veteran: on occasion with my live in girlfriend. DRO: Uh-huh Veteran: But I can't masturbate. If I masturbate, my back is totally --- DRO: It just kills you. Veteran: Freaked out. DRO: Yeah Veteran: So on that piece of it, thats pretty much all throughout ---- DRO: So your finally ---- Veteran: my DRO: physically cured of that without having to worry about ------ Veteran: Right DRO: The psychiatric end --------- Veteran: In a strange way of a ------ DRO: --- of all the ------ Veteran: bad back and testicle thing DRO: yeah Veteran: took care of that. Because I just -------- DRO: That's not a good way to take care of things. Veteran: No it's not. DAV REP: It's extremely painful. DRO: Yeah Now in my current case I am claiming loss of use a of creative organ based on 200mg of Zoloft a day which doesn't allow you to climax, sometimes I can't get an erection from the back, and of course if I was able to have occasional sex as in 2004 I would be in extreme pain after doing it. My question is shouldn't the DRO has raised the issue that the use of my creative organ at the time was limited / lost based on not being able to masturbate and being extremely painful when I could have sex. Or does it mean nothing except maybe to help my back and testicle ratings which are coming back to the BVA to be re-evaluated back to 2000? Thanks.

Hey Devil Dog, Let me tell you from a another Devil dog's experience with not showing my feelings. I have severe ddd at three levels with two failed surgerys which means no sitting, standing, or walking far without wanting to puke from the pain, severe daily panic attacks and anxiety, moderate asthma that causes me to wheeze most of the time, pes cavus in both feet and now ankle equines which means standing and walking far is out of the question, chronic right testicle pain, high blood pressure, eczema which causes me to itch constantly, there may be some more too LOL. For years I manned up and went to exams with my Marine face on. I get around people I don't know and I try to be the big old bad Marine. The problem is your body and mind somehow allow you to do this and look fine. Prior to me stopping work 7 months ago because I finally got TDIU most people at work couldn't even tell I had anything wrong with me. About three years ago in conjunction with hadit and other resources I realized most of my ratings were low because I sucked up the pain and played it cool in the exam. I finally realized if I was going to be able to take care of the wife and kids I had to get passed the hard corps deal. I started telling the mental examiner the truth and even crying, in back exams I actually showed pain and told the truth, etc. Unfortunately VA examiners can be the most unqualified medical professionals to exam us but showing your true disabilities on exam day is crucial. I know it's tough as I keep everything inside myself but for exams you have to show your true self and how your disabilities affect you. After I did this I went from 70% to 80% to 100%. Granted I am a mess but you get the picture. Semper Fi Devil Dog

Oops two entries about my back in service on the same week. They could have easily denied my claim based on my back was fine throughput service and I never complained of back pain on my final physical. I guess the difference in my case with others that try to get connected years later is that 2 years after service I have an MRI showing 3 blown discs. They actually said I look like a 65 year old who did hard labor his whole life. At the time I was 25.

If you want my take I'd appeal your back and hip decisions ASAP. It will definitely take some work on your part getting letters, etc. I filed for a back condition secondary to my pes cavus feet in 2000. This was five years after I got out of service. My first back problem appeared in 97 so the one year after service did not apply. Anyway I went to my DAV SO and he said there is no way your going to get secondary to your feet or direct for your back because you don't have the evidence. Needless to say I received direct service connection in 2000 for my back and then a secondary for mental and hypertension later down the road. I don't know your exact situation but based on what civilian Podiatrists and neurosurgeons have told me over the years it definitely is a possibly you can get connected. I'd be willing to help you out. We could compare cases and see if anyone I used applies to you. BTW I had only one note in my service medical records about my back, and I broke my right foot 3rd metatarsal and stress fractured my left foot 3rd metatarsal in service. Your feet sound 100 worse than mine. Your gait definitely could have led to your hip and back issues. Let me know.

Thanks tssnave and darkhorse. Yeah I forgot mental was 70 and then 100. Thanks quint great information! Thanks darkhorse I appreciate the support!

Hey Devil Dog, I'm surprised they actually operated on you. Did it help at all? We have alot in common. I was in the Corps 91-95. Broke my right 3rd metatarsal in boot camp, left stress fracture of 3rd metatarsal in MCT. After that I sucked it up for the rest of my 4 years. Once I got out I was diagnosed with pes cavus, rigid feet, and most recently ankle equines. As Pete said they let you in so now their on the hook. There is so much evidence out there that military personal end up with feet problems because of the stress in boot camp and thereafter. I didn't even realize I had high arch feet prior to going in. However, they didn't say anything on the MEPS exam. Being in the Corps I can only assume you ran, and humped during your time in? Unfortunately its popular opinion in my case that my feet took my lower 3 discs out L3-S1. Do you have any lower back issues? I ended up getting service connected directly for my back based on 2 reports in boot camp of back pain and my first surgeon stating it was possible my back got messed up while in.

Hi Berta, Thanks for the case I'll reference that as well.

Yes I have been out for only 7 months. I was wondering how that would work with the wavier of premiums.

Hi All, I am trying to get an initial 10% rating for my high blood pressure. As part of my reasoning I am trying to apply 4.3 reasonable doubt and possibly 4.7 higher of two evaluations. I have been on hbp meds since 1997 when I was diagnosed. My readings were constantly 150s/90s even on the meds. I have been fighting this for what seems like forever. Service connection was awarded in 2002 secondary to my sc back pain and given a 0% rating because I have only had sporadic readings over 100 for my diastolic pressure. Here is the 10% rating criteria: Diastolic pressure predominantly 100 or more, or; systolic pressure predominantly 160 or more, or; minimum evaluation for an individual with a history of diastolic pressure predominantly 100 or more who requires continuous medication for control. Note (1): Hypertension or isolated systolic hypertension must be confirmed by readings taken two or more times on at least three different days. For purposes of this section, the term hypertension means that the diastolic blood pressure is predominantly 90mm. or greater, and isolated systolic hypertension means that the systolic blood pressure is predominantly 160mm. or greater with a diastolic blood pressure of less than 90mm. I have had five readings on different days documented over 100 for diastolic pressure. This is while on medication. I was given a blood pressure cuff from the VA and have to come in for readings. Of course to make this harder for me once I get on opiates in 2007 my pressure has been in the 120s / 80s or lower usually. I even had several readings in the 140-150 / 90s in service 91-95 when I was supposedly healthy. I have looked at many BVA cases with similar stories and they seem to end up given the 10% rating based on CFR 4.3. I haven't made it to the BVA so I probably would get 10% because its a joke and 10% is awarded for a hang nail. In my case 10% means something to me because I have a chance of getting 100% schedular back to 2002. Since I was 70% in 2002, 80% in 2008, and 100% in 2009 there is a chance a big back pay here hence why I am fighting this tooth and nail. I think alone I would be okay but I wondered if anyone had experience applying CFR 4.7 higher of two evaluations when the rating schedule does not have a 0% rating for an aliment such as high blood pressure. Granted under CFR 4.31 zero percent ratings it says In every instance where the schedule does not provide a zero percent evaluation for a diagnostic code, a zero percent evaluation shall be assigned when the requirements for a compensable evaluation are not met. So how do I agrue CFR 4.7 when there is no 0% criteria. Certainly I would think in this case based on my readings, need for constant meds since 97, history of medium HBP since in service, VA giving me a blood pressure cuff, and keeping a BP log for the VA, I would meet 10% based on CFR 4.3 and CFR 4.7. Anyone differ with that opinion or have any recommendations for formulating a stronger attack? Thanks.

jbasser - I hear you on that one. I have been denied 4 times for life insurance. I actually was able to convert a 500k policy I had at my last place of employment. I only took 200k and it's $300 a month. I understand what you are saying about being lucky to get anything believe me. I just think disabled vets should be able to purchase at least 100k or so. In 9 years and 6 months my dependents can get DIC but prior to getting 100% I was 80%. If I died and it wasn't service connected my dependents would have been up the creek. John - That's what I have read and don't take pills with Tylenol so I guess I'm good there. I still am leary about ativan / buspar and Zoloft though. I haven't told the VA yet I am sober but the mental health examiner who diagnosed me with alcohol and prescription drug abuse / dependence did make a statement to the fact that it was more likely than not that my chronic pain was the underlying condition. I hear what you are saying about them trying to screw me with the alcohol. Honestly I told the examiner because I thought it would help get my mental rating higher and it actually did LOL.

Yeah that's what I thought. I am trying to stay sober and have been for a while now. I just get scared taking all these meds that my liver is going to crap out and my wife and kids will be screwed. 20k in VA life insurance doesn't do crap. We should definitely be eligible for larger amounts even if we have to pay for it. Only 9 years and 6 months to go for dic protection :)

Hi Everyone, I was diagnosed at my last two mental health examinations in addition to anxiety disorder (not specified) with abuse / depenence for prescription opiates, benzodiazepines, and alcohol. I know all about the deal with secondary service connection, veteran willful misconduct, etc. My concern is that if I die based on say a liver decease and I haven't hit the 10 year mark for TDIU that my dependents will get screwed out of dic. Now the benzodiazepines (Ativan / Valium) on I have been on since 2002 are directly prescribed for my service connected anxiety disorder, the opiates I have been on since 2006 are prescribed directly for my service connected back (oxycontin and oxycodone), and the alcohol has been causally linked through my own statements, etc. to self medicate my panic attacks, anxiety, and chronic pain. I guess the question is should I file for secondaries or with the exception of alcohol am I already covered because they were prescribed for service connections? By the way I have no aliments that are not service connected. If anyone knows about or has dealt with this replies would be appreciated. Thanks.

Thanks Pete and Teac, I'm going to submit based on what I found and see what happens. I guess I will be able to you my outcome in say 1-10 years. LOL. Sounds like a prison sentence doesn't it. Thanks everyone.

Yes they gave me a C&P exam coupled with my general TDIU exam. I believe she only noted eczema on my chest. If my hair is long you can't see it on my scalp all the time. I should have shaved my head then you really see. The examiner so no occupational impairment. When you say the BVA may address theses two claims is that by me appealing their denial for an increased rating?

Pete, The back, right testicle pain, left and right feet just got remanded from the U.S. court back to the BVA. When I brought up the fact that I thought the ezcema and hypertension was dropped they treated them as increases and just denied them again saying since their intial rating of 0% neither has gotten worse.

Hey Pete, What date did you file your claim? July 22, 2002 what date did you get your 0% service connection for eczema? August 10, 2004 what date did you file the NOD? September 24, 2004 I filed one / December 15, 2004 Disabled American Veterans filed another for me. (not sure why) what date was the SOC? April 20, 2005 what date did you file the form 9 appeal? September 24, 2004 / Disabled American Veterans again filed a file 9 for me on Augiust, 1, 2004. Both form 9s state I want to appeal all of the issues listed on the statement of the case. On April 20, 2005 I recieved a document called an appeal status election where I selected no. This action satisfies none of my issues. The issues listed were: Evaluation of back condition Evaluation of residuals of fracture, right, 3rd metatarsal Evaluation of residuals of fracture, left, 3rd metatarsal Evaluation of chronic testicular and groin pain Evaluation of hypertension - they are denying that I appealed this too. Evaluation of eczema All six of these had denials dated August 10, 2004. That's when I filed the form 9. I sent the VA a letter dated September 24, 2004 stating what I thought all the above conditions should be rated. The only issue not discussed was eczema. I can only speculate I forgot to add it to the letter. I also state in the letter I will be filing a form 9 for all issues decided on August 10, 2004. After the April letter I expected all of these issues were headed to the BVA. In December 2005 I received a letter saying that my case wads recieved at the BVA. No mention of what issues. This was when I went to VARO and they told me eczema and hypertension did go. I then sent the BVA a letter and additional evidence pertaining to all six issues dated December 3, 2007 which was stamped received by the BVA on December 13, 2007. I never received anything after April 2005 saying that hypertenision and eczema were separate from these issues and that I needed to act on them.

Pete, I was wondering when the ratings actually went into affect. I'm good though because my service connection date is July 22, 2002. That means I actually fall under the July 1, 2001 rating which is the same as 2002. Now is this considered a CUE if they try and say that I never filed an appeal? My award letter never mentions the criteria in effect for 2001 or 2003 they just compare my symptoms against the 2003 - criteria.

Hi Everyone, I have a new one for the crew. I was awarded service connection for eczema in July 22, 2002. They assigned me a 0% rating based on the criteria in effect for 2004. This service connection came from a DRO review in 2004 which consisted of a total of 8 issues. The DRO gave me the initial 0% for eczema, initial 0% for hypertension, changed my asthma rating from 10% to 30% back to 1997, denied service connection for a mental disorder secondary to my sc back (since connected and rated at 50%), and denied higher ratings for my back, chronic right testicle pain, chronic left foot weakness and pain, and chronic right foot weakness and pain. This issue has two problems with it. First and foremost I appealed all issues above in 2005 and have a copy of the appeal sheet. I verified the sheet was in my c file too earlier this year. At that point I thought my back, right and left feet, testicle pain, eczema, and hypertension went to the BVA. I never received anything after that pertaining to just my eczema and hypertension. My form 9 stated the same thing as the appeal sheet that I wanted all the decisions made in the 2004 rating to go to the BVA. I found out eczema and hypertension never made it to the BVA after my March 2008 BVA decision. I even went to the RO during the waiting period for the BVA decision and talked with a VA rep who verified it went to the BVA. So much for that. I am assuming because I have many service connections and a large c file someone got confused. So the RO is contending that decision was final. Now I am contending the intial rating should be re-opened based on the appeal document, form 9 and the benefit of doubt doctrine. To make things take another turn I realized their decision was based on the 2003 criteria for eczema. The criteria was different in 2002 and looks like it is much easier for me to get 10% than the changed 2003 criteria. Below I have listed the different ratings. I have documented medical records showing on different visits my eczema was on my hands, arms, chest, and scalp. Under the 2003 criteria you need to have at least 5% of your entire body covered. I believe during flare-ups I meet this anyway but the RO says I don't. I also use steroid cream daily but they are saying it's only topical which falls under the 0% rating. I have told them many times that my eczema itches so bad I want to cut it off. I had several lay statements submitted that they see me itching and bothering me. So my question is even though I am saying I appealed it and have proof hence it's not a final decision isn't this a CUE anyway because they should have used the criteria which would have given me the highest rating? The criteria in effect for July, 2002 seems more beneficial. Here are the two ratings: 2002 - 7806 Eczema: With ulceration or extensive exfoliation or crusting, and systemic or nervous manifestations, or exceptionally repugnant ............................... 50 With exudation or itching constant, extensive lesions, or marked disfigurement ........................ 30 With exfoliation, exudation or itching, if involving an exposed surface or extensive area ............. 10 With slight, if any, exfoliation, exudation or itching, if on a nonexposed surface or small area ................................................................... 0 2004 - 7806 Dermatitis or eczema. More than 40 percent of the entire body or more than 40 percent of exposed areas affected, or; constant or near-constant systemic therapy such as corticosteroids or other immunosuppressive drugs required during the past 12-month period .... 60 20 to 40 percent of the entire body or 20 to 40 percent of exposed areas affected, or; systemic therapy such as corticosteroids or other immunosuppressive drugs required for a total duration of six weeks or more, but not constantly, during the past 12-month period ........................................ 30 At least 5 percent, but less than 20 percent, of the entire body, or at least 5 percent, but less than 20 percent, of exposed areas affected, or; intermittent systemic therapy such as corticosteroids or other immunosuppressive drugs required for a total duration of less than six weeks during the past 12-month period .................... 10 Less than 5 percent of the entire body or less than 5 percent of exposed areas affected, and; no more than topical therapy required during the past 12-month period 0 Or rate as disfigurement of the head, face, or neck (DC 7800) or scars (DC’s 7801, 7802, 7803, 7804, or 7805), depending upon the predominant disability.