Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts
Read Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules
Doc John
-
Posts
56 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
VA Disability and Benefits Information
VA Benefits News
Store
Posts posted by Doc John
-
-
Yes, I see a VA psychiatrist regularly and am on several psychotropic meds and also receive individual counseling at the Vet Center every two weeks.
I didn't know I would need a letter. Thank you for mentioning it. My wife is going with me and will give her testimony if she is allowed to.
-
I am scheduled for a C&P evaluation for rating purposes tomorrow at the VARO, Bay Pines, FL. Currently I am at 30% for PTSD. Things have gotten worse and I applied for an increase in compensation. What can I expect- will I be reexamined by another psychiatrist or will I see a hearing officer?
My American Legion rep said it is possible to lose my compensation and I am very afraid I might somehow say the wrong thing.
-
Bluewater- as in Gator Navy- amphibious ships with 31st MAU/ ARG 6.
I will watch for the Haas Report. When is it due out?
Doc John
-
Thanks to Pete and Berta.
I am now looking for an environmental medicine specialist near my home in St. Petersburg, Fl.
Doc John
-
Thanks for the feedback everyone,
I have been gone since Thanksgiving and I was glad to see the responses on this thread.
My oncologist (cancer doc) said he cannot state that AO "more likely than not" caused my adenoid cystic carcinoma.
I think the advice about seeing an AO expert might be just what I need to follow up on.
If there are any vets from the Vietnam war who had successful claims for exposure on to AO on Okinawa let me know.
DJ
-
Berta,
AO presumptive for cancers does not have to be "Soft Tissue Sarcoma" but STS is one of the 11 AO presumptive diseases......however they also list 25 cancers that are under Soft Tissue Sarcoma.
I have Larynx Cancer and it is AO presumptive under another one of the 11 under Respiratory Cancers. It is no way Soft Tissue Sarcoma and I was a Marine near the DMZ in 1968-1969.
Please don't get hung up on the AO presumed cancers being only Soft Tissue Sarcoma as there are many other AO presumptive cancers that are not, such as basil cell carcinoma and Squamous Cell Carcinoma which is the only type of cancer there is in the throat and larynx.
Rule of Thumb is if it is listed below then it is AO presumptive. For example DMII. There are a bunch of secondary conditions related to DMII such as periphial Neuropathy due to DMII, even though Periphial Neuropathy was not diagnosed 1 year after service in Vietnam it was not the cause of AO. DMII was the cause of AO and then the Periphial Neuropathy was caused by the DMII as a secondary condition.
e) Disease associated with exposure to certain herbicide agents. If
a veteran was exposed to an herbicide agent during active military,
naval, or air service, the following diseases shall be service-connected
if the requirements of Sec. 3.307(a)(6) are met even though there is no
record of such disease during service, provided further that the
rebuttable presumption provisions of Sec. 3.307(d) are also satisfied.
Chloracne or other acneform disease consistent with chloracne
Type 2 diabetes (also known as Type II diabetes mellitus or adult-onset
diabetes)
Hodgkin's disease
Chronic lymphocytic leukemia
Multiple myeloma
Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma
Acute and subacute peripheral neuropathy
Porphyria cutanea tarda
Prostate cancer
Respiratory cancers (cancer of the lung, bronchus, larynx, or trachea)
Soft-tissue sarcoma (other than osteosarcoma, chondrosarcoma, Kaposi's
sarcoma, or mesothelioma)
Note 1: The term ``soft-tissue sarcoma'' includes the following:
Adult fibrosarcoma
Dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans
Malignant fibrous histiocytoma
Liposarcoma
Leiomyosarcoma
Epithelioid leiomyosarcoma (malignant leiomyoblastoma)
Rhabdomyosarcoma
Ectomesenchymoma
[[Page 243]]
Angiosarcoma (hemangiosarcoma and lymphangiosarcoma)
Proliferating (systemic) angioendotheliomatosis
Malignant glomus tumor
Malignant hemangiopericytoma
Synovial sarcoma (malignant synovioma)
Malignant giant cell tumor of tendon sheath
Malignant schwannoma, including malignant schwannoma with
rhabdomyoblastic differentiation (malignant Triton tumor), glandular and
epithelioid malignant schwannomas
Malignant mesenchymoma
Malignant granular cell tumor
Alveolar soft part sarcoma
Epithelioid sarcoma
Clear cell sarcoma of tendons and aponeuroses
Extraskeletal Ewing's sarcoma
Congenital and infantile fibrosarcoma
Malignant ganglioneuroma
Note 2: For purposes of this section, the term acute and subacute
peripheral neuropathy means transient peripheral neuropathy that appears
within weeks or months of exposure to an herbicide agent and resolves
within two years of the date of onset.
-
An Okinawa vet succeeded at the BVA with his AO claim. I posted the decision here some time ago.
He proved direct exposure- also for many years Congressman Lane Evans tried to get DOD to admit AO was used on Okinawa and I think he burned himself out on that- he is very ill himself now- hope it isnt a AO disability.
By the little atoll did you mean Johnson Atoll in the pacific?
Hi Berta,
Johnson Atoll is the one I am thinking of and I think the agent orange was dumped in '71 or '72. I was on Okinawa in '73, but I understand that the stuff stays in the soil and can harm living creatures for many years.
It was loaded on ships at the same piers where we loaded our amphibious assault ships with Marines and equipment.
Too bad about Evans, maybe someone else will pick up the line.
Thanks,
Doc
-
HEY,
Get your 2nd chance and tell the TRUTH. If your suffering from PTSD and Major Depression, you most likely have suicide thoughts. Tell the truth. I was in denial to it for years and years.
Tell the truth and you will get your just rating.
Lately, I have come to that same conclusion. By denying or avoiding the whole story, I have prolonged the process and caused myself more grief...
Thanks Doc John
p.s. my brother was a corpsman on the Repose in 1968/1969, got COG/RVN/PH. Died last year at 59. SC100% for PTSD + AO lung cancer.
-
I feel like Josephine- like "I just want to go for it".
Doc John,
I wish to God that I could bring a lawyer into my claim. I would definitly consider that 20% more than reasonable.
I will be honest with you, if I could turn this stupid claim of mine over to a lawyer right now, I would consider 50% a bargain, I woud jump for joy to turn this trunk full of papers from 1978 to date to someone else. I feel like striking a match to the whole mess and throwing up my hands and calling it quits.
Go for it before the VA drives you crazy as they have me.
Always,
Josephine
Josephine,
You are preaching to the choir. I am with you on this subject 100% and I, too, have been dealing with the psychiatrists since 1981, about five years after my first active duty enlistment.
Where I really messed up first was in not going to the M.D.s in the service (out of shame and guilt) and then by waiting until 2000 to file my first claim with the VA. Instead I got treatment with IMOs on my own insurance, two of whom have retired and my records no longer exist.
The Department of the Navy Historical section has helped me get records from Judge Advocate General but there is always a whited out space where the names of witnesses, coworkers, and patients I treated, got "dedacted"(sp).
After I get the next IMO letter conforming to what the VA demands, I am off to the lawyer. A 20% contingency fee is more reasonable every minute!
Thanks,
Doc John
-
T
Tbird,
I went to that link and read :
"A mental condition has been formally diagnosed, but symptoms are not severe enough either to interfere with occupational and social functioning or to require continuous medication".
The problem with THE DRO decision is that my medical records clearly show that I am constantly on at least one, and right now, two antidepressants, and xanax and I can only work a four hour day at very structured types of tasks of a repetetive nature. I have only one close friend and cannot sustain long lasting relationships or even acquantances without screwing things up...except my second marriage which is going on 15 years because of my wife's understanding and commitment to our vows.
On meds I am probably 30%. Off meds I would be an in-patient or a cell mate somewhere.
I will prevail.
Thanks, Brother.
-
Would like to help but without knowing what the decsion says as to why??? Your stressors maybe? Do you have the diagnosis? If so what is the problem you know what I mean, VA is the problem obvious. I would like to see the decision on the PTSD denial. If you wish.....Q
BQ,
My stressors were non-combat - As a ward Corpsman on surgical ICU at Long Beach Naval Hospital in 1972, as an Emergency Medical Tech on an ambulance crew at Camp Pendleton, Ca. and as a FMF grunt platoon corpsman with the USMC 3RDMARDIV and 1STMARDIV 1973-1976.
Thanks,
Doc John
-
I think I might get the 20% lawyer. I don't like the fact that your VSO filed a new claim when you got granted a 0% from the DRO. New claim means a new effective date. It seems to me you could have filed an NOD on the DRO's decision and kept your old effective date. I agree with TestVet about 0% for PTSD being absurd. That just does not make any sense. The VA will lump all the mental conditions together and give you a rating for just one of them. The VA service connected me for a host of emotional disorders from bipolar disorder to PTSD but I was rated 70% for just one mental condition. Why did the VSO file a new claim? He should have asked for a reconsideration with new evidence. If you get a really good IMO you may not need a lawyer. That is my opinion.
Big John,
I think the VSO screwed up on this one, too.
I didn't realize it until I noticed that the appeal had no "PTSD" on it.
Do ya think VSO's ever make "under the table" deals with the DRO's? I wonder.
Know any good lawyers in our TampaBay area?
I got an appointment with Dr. Karatinos for the IMO.
Thanks,
Doc John
-
I have never heard of anyone rated at 0% for PTSD, if the VSO files for new conditions they will not use your original filing date for PTSD they will more than likely use whatever date the new paperwork is turned in, if you fall under the guidelines for using an attorney the 20% is normal and customary and if the VA approves the use of your attorney they will pay him out of your backpay and send you the difference like with SSD paying a lwayer a percentage of something is better than keeping 100% of nothing
Hey TestVet,
My wife and I were just laughing at that "100% of nothing".
That makes a lot of sense. I think i'll go with the IMO AND the Lawyer. I really don't have anything to lose, do I????
Thanks Brother,
Doc John
-
Hey y'all,
I am on my second VA decision for PTSD and MDD since April. The C&P in March said I have major depression " which more likely than not began during my service" as an EMT and Navy 8404 Field Medical Tech at Okinawa and Camp Pendleton in the early 1970's.
Right after my DRO hearing (where I got the 0%) my VSR filed a new claim (VAFORM 21-4138) for
Panic Aattacks ,Anxiety, MDD, and Depression. I wonder if I get a new claim iniation date that will start the clock again?
Will I still have my SC for the PTSD dated April 2005 if it is not on the new appeal form?
At this point I have made an appointment for an IMO with an ex-VA psychiatrist to get a letter to rebutt the 0% SC rating the DRO gave me. (Thanks to john999)
I am considering an attorney and thought one of the other hadit members might know a pro bono or dirt cheap lawyer who is familiar with VA comp appeals in the St.Petersburg/Tampa, Florida area.
I have spoken to one Atty who wants 20% of any settlement. Is that reasonable?
How would he get paid, by me or VA?
I feel like Josephine- like "I just want to go for it".
Thanks, Doc John
-
That's very encouraging. I'll ask my primary care MD to set it up.
Doc John
-
John,
Go to this site below, and download booklet...It'a for AO vets....print it out and read it, you may be able, if it's not on the presumptive list, to be secondary to an item on the presumptive list..
Have you taken the Agent Orange test? by the VA...
Revised Agent Orange Handbook... September 5, 2006
VHA Handbook 1302.01, 9/5/06, Agent Orange Registry (AOR) Program Procedures To Include All Veterans Exposed To Agent Orange And Special Health Care Benefits For Vietnam Veterans' Children Thanks, Buick,
This was a good site for research! I will get VA to give me the test.
Doc
-
CUE- a clear and unmistakable legal error that the VA made in a final unappealed rating decision -that caused the veteran a monetary loss.
AO Agent Orange-
We had a dictionary somewhere here for the acronyms we use.
Thanks Berta. I remember seeing the dictionary once, but now I can't find it.
I wasn't sprayed with AO but it was stored in barrels on Okinawa at, I believe, Camp Futenma. That was where I had to go to see the dentist for my TMJ.
The navy finally dumped it all on some little atoll in the Pacific.
Doc John
-
PS -there is a CUE claim I posted here and cannot find it yet-
regarding an AO vet whose comp was dropped and he fought it under CUE claim and succeeded.
This vet had a disability that the VA granted years ago due to AO which does not appear on the AO list.He had a very strong medical opinion.
His comp was restored.
Berta,
Thanks for your reply. I am a newbie at hadit and do not always understand acronyms an abbreviations.
What are "CUE" and "AO" ?
Doc John
-
fwd from: VNVets
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Hard Words from a Shipmate
These are some hard words from a shipmate in the Blue Water Navy Veterans of the Vietnam War. We think it is time they were said.
--------------------------------------------
One of the extremely dangerous affects of the VA winning the Haas case is that, once they have successfully treated the Blue Water Navy as a "sub-class" or "new category" of veteran, essentially legally dividing the whole into parts, they will be able to use that as precedent to pick and choose which veterans get which types of benefits.
Up until this point, all veterans (e.g., combat veterans, POWs, support troops, etc.) fall into the same class and are eligible for all benefits. If the Haas case is ruled in favor of the DVA, they will be able to exclude any veteran from receiving full medical and compensation benefits simply by creating another sub-class of veteran, as they are attempting to do here.
Let me give an example: In the XX War, veterans serving on active duty in combat or combat support would all assume they would receive medical treatment and compensation for injuries sustained in the XX War. But after the XX War is over, the Department of Veteran Affairs could proclaim that any veteran of the XX War who served further than 12 miles from some arbitrary geographical point is not eligible for full veteran benefits, even though the enemy could and did detonate weapons up to 20 miles from the arbitrary point. Those veterans who were injured by those "out of bounds" detonations are, by their own jargon, S.O.L. They will be denied medical care and monetary compensation for any injuries sustained while on active duty during the XX War.
That is exactly what is happening to the Blue Water Navy veterans of the Vietnam War. They are not being given the same medical care and compensation as the troops they supported, fought along side of, and died with. The winning of the Haas case, or the enactment of S-2026, will guarantee that the DVA can create categories of future veterans at whim, and deny them full benefits such as those received by veterans who served within the 12 mile zone from our hypothetical example.
"Impossible!" you might say? It is happening now. It is what the heart of the Haas case and what the S-2026 bill are all about. It is what the Blue Water Navy of the Vietnam War is currently experiencing and has experienced since early 2002. It is not a mere probability - it is current fact.
This situation says to the future United States military member of any branch of service: "Take your chances. Come fight our war. You might or might not receive your medical treatment and combat injury disability payments from the DVA. You won't know until after you've been injured and the War is over. But go ahead, sign on the dotted line." As a veteran of the Vietnam War, my best advice to the youth of America is "Don't play their silly game of Russian Roulette. If these problems are not fixed NOW, stay as far away from service to this Government as you can get. They lie and have no intention of taking care of you if you are injured in battle."
Of course, that's not a hard message to swallow given the current non-treatment and ill-treatment of returning veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan. Even when they claim to be keeping their promise of "We'll take care of you!" the care is so poor and takes so long that it is a national disgrace. This is no longer a Government worth defending. Nonetheless, it is a hard message to give, and I do so only with a very heavy heart and many tears. But this is no longer the Government that I made and kept my pledge of allegiance to. All things change over time, but the principles of Honesty and Integrity must remain constant - and the current leadership of our country has lost touch with those Ideals.
JPR
--------------------------------------------
Our tears join yours, and our heart is also heavy at the perversion of the American Ideal by vain and greedy politicians who talk from both sides of their mouths at once. There are no friends to the American Veteran in the United States Government.
VNVets
"With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan--to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all nations." -- President Abraham Lincoln
"Without a decisive naval force we can do nothing definitive, and with it, everything honorable and glorious." --President George Washington
Dear JP,
I am affraid your assessment of the high beaurocracy may be right on. How can they exclude those veterans who were injured in the line of duty- no matter where that duty led them. Blue water, red dirt, rice paddy or cloudy sky, a disabled military veteran is the same.
Doc John
-
Berta,
Last night I did some more searching and found the soft tissue cancer list you spoke of. Mine was not there. I also searched VA for adenoid cystic carcinoma and found that in most claims it was denied as service connected.
Thanks,
Doc John
-
I understand this point of view but don't share it. I didn't want out of the "rat race". I would love to do something. If someone is able to overcome their disability then I applaud them.
For certain, I don't recieve $4,000 a month at 100%. But even at $4000 I could make more when I was able to work. I had the opportunity to make much more. And enjoy what I was doing.
I wish I could do it, cause I would.
That's the short answer to "why".
Time
I agree with you, Time. I was off work for a year for cancer and another year for back surgery and almost any thing is better than not being productive if you can be.
HM2 Doc John
-
I was told by my VSO that some cancers are "presumptive" for service connection.
I had cancer surgery in 2000 for adenoid cystic carcinoma (a.k.a. cylindroma) , along with chemotherapy and radiation. My face is disfigured and I need physical therapy on my jaw 20-30 times a year so that I can open my mouth and chew solid food.
I am in remission but have been assured by my oncologist that metastases will occur eventually in my lungs, and it will kill me if I don't die waiting for it.
I searched hadit.com and found this decision from the VA::: http://www.va.gov/vetapp93/files2/9315426.txt
If I could get it, I would appreciate some expert VA advice from the Elders, VA employees or Berta, who helped this widow originally.
Thanks,
Doc John
-
As a Hospital Corpsman from 1972-1992 I found that no one wanted to be labled as having a personality disorder. Including me.
It sometimes led to a less than honorable discharge and the label followed you even after leaving the service. From working as a USMC platoon corpsman to working at the OCS clinic at Quantico, I saw the person tagged with "personality disorder" discharged with no service connected disability.
The Navy and Marine Corps attached a stigma to those service men and women who complained of any symptoms which are now called PTSD and Major Depressive Disorder.
I had those symptoms on active duty but would not have gone to an M.D. unless I was coming completely unraveled.
And now I have to prove my claim for PTSD is higher rated than 0%.
You are not alone. My DRO stated I "embellished" my military service and medical records.
How the heck do you do that? Either they are true or not, I did not write my own records.
I think john999 is right "These guys can invent anything to avoid a payout of big bucks" but they cannot rewrite history.
Doc John
-
The DRO added the one word, "embellished", to describe what she otherwise found to be a service connection for my PTSD in her report.
It is impossible for anyone to embellish medical or military documents. They are either true or false.
My shrink says that this is just another way of taking away some of the affirmation from her report to personally demean me.
Let her have her kicks. In the end the truth will prevail.
Hearing For Increase In Compensation
in PTSD Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Claims
Posted
No, I am not working, but I am attending school 1/2 time on Chapter 31, Voc Rehab, benefits. I am struggling to pass. Memory and concentration are poor.