akwidow

And I am doing the joy dance here for you in Alaska!

Wings you are wonderful! Thank you so much for that case law! Yes, the VA has a copy of the death certificate. Now here is a good question. Does that IMO have to be made by a famous doctor? My local professional already said that PTSD had a direct connection to my husband's death. He didn't say early death however in his statement. If his word will be enough, I can go back to him as ask for another statement that says 'early death' with a dot by dot connection, notarized of course. I have all the records to show the doctor, along with the statements of the other professionals who treated my late hubby and/or observed him over the years... My spirit has been raised by your work, and I salute you~!

yes, the death certificate was amended to add PTSD as secondary cause of death. I was going over his psych exams yesterday, and found the paragraph where in 2003 the VA examiner opined that my vet was suffering greatly in the early 90's from his ptsd. This co-insides with his psych phd counselor who made the same conclusion. I reread medical reports I gathered, and feel my doctor letters both medical and psych efficiently support my claim. They all meet the at least likely as not standard. My first application was hand written, and poorly supported...grief written. The data I supplied after the remand was not listed as evidence and the reasons and basis section did not address the remand completely - they still did not tell my why my data did not count as proof. They simply dismissed it as immaterial.

Thank you Pete, that is what the definition of wed as one means, right? ------- Cause of death was listed as colon cancer, with ptsd added by amendment as secondary cause by his diagnosing internist. True to his Jewish faith, my guy requested no embalming, and quick burial. His best friend had built him a very fine pine domed coffin which we used much earlier than expected. It was -25 the day he died, and -30 the next day when we put him in the ground. He lay in his coffin in our living room after our friends cleaned him and dressed him in his fancy threads, and the hearse came to our house the next day to take him to the cemetary. I had written his obituary a few months before he died because I knew I wouldn't be capable later. Since he died in the morning, the local newspaper was able to get the obit in the next day edition, and there was a large crowd at the cemetary in spite of the -30 temperatures. He had died the day before his birthday. We buried him on his birthday, and the party we had planned for that night became his wake. 100's of people came and went through our doors that day after the burial, and even though I was in a black fog, I could feel the love and loss exxpressed by the folks who came. I couldn't talk very well, but I could read. So I read aloud about him from the emails we received from the people who could not come in person to his wake. He was a man very loved by those who bothered to know him. I was so lucky to have him as long as I did...and at times I still feel his loving embrace in my mind. I am so sorry that I was not smart about these VA issues when he was alive, as I could have been helping him with VA long before he died. But I was not, and I have forgiven myself for not "knowing" about VA earlier. To paraphrase what Larry says, "You must have all the voices in your head act as a unified front in order to fight and win a battle....and they (the voices) should like each other!"

Thank you - I do feel your good vibes, and am gratefully accepting them all. He was a handsome man, but the love he gave me in spite of his disfunctions far out weighed the value of his good looks, and since he gave me the gift of being able to love and have faith in myself, I became a much better person for meeting him. I will be forever grateful for that.

Well, I got the file boxes back out to start again with fresh eyes. First thing I looked at was his rating decision from 2003 where they granted 50% for PTSD. I glanced down at the denied shrapnel wounds list, hearing, and cancer claims via AO, and I found the presumptive denial of course for colon cancer 7344 (BTW, 7344 is for Benign neoplasms of the digestive system) hmmmm....how can a benign neoplasm be colon cancer? Further on down the list I found 7913 which they titled Exposure to Agent Orange. I looked up the code and it is for DMII! He never made a claim for DMII, but they denied him anyway! Since I have found sympotoms of DMII I was going to pursue that, so didn't they open the door for me? Like I said in other posts, I can't thank you folks here enough for the education I have received since I found you early this year....and if my guy were still alive he would be thanking you too.

Don't you worry about me - I will get that NOD in the mail on time if it is the last thing I do. I have a telephonic appointment with Kenneth Carpenter on Nov. 12. My 30 days is up on November 20, or the 19th if we split hairs as October has 31 days. I have plenty of time to write a simple NOD and will do so asap. Thanks for your time and your caring...

my late hubby was a hoarder too. He had so much old ugly stuff in the yard, that people were known to pull out of our driveway rather than come in. I had to haul a lot of eyesore away after he died.

way to never give up!! ;)

Wings - I still did not pull out the court decision, but now I understand what you mean. The Court basically told the BVA to tell me why my evidence did not count, and to make sure I received the VCAA information. I had claimed that my husband died of colon cancer with a secondary of PTSD...his avoidance caused him to neglect his health. No, AMD did not develop or discuss the EED PTSD or Asthma issues; there is no mention of them. This would be a CUE? I plan on cue-ing the earlier denied decisions in his file. That is a lot of CUE! In this current denial they listed none fo the additoinal information I sent them TWICE, and and provided no evidence section in the SSOC. They still did not tell my why my evdence did not count. In another thread, Carlie said in part "It is important to study the Reasons and Bases Section of the Rating Decision that you are filing the NOD on, (I am assuming here that you filed a NOD). The Reasons and Bases Section, along with the Evidence Section are usually very helpful in preparing your appeal, in the way that they will point to what is needed in order to get the claim granted." After I read the above noted thread, I saw under Reasons and Bases in my SSOC dated October 20, 2009 the following: As noted, the Board of Veterans Appeals remanded your appeal for additional evidential development, in pursuant ot the Veterans Claims Assistance Act (VCAA) notification, evidential development, and readjudication. On April 4, 2008, we sent you a VCAA development letter asking you to submit and/or specify evidence to support your appeal. To date, we have not receibed any response and/or additional evidence from you, in support of yor appeal, to our request. We received a letter requesting additional records for the veteran's medical care in Vietnam in 1968. We responded to your letter on April 11, 2008. We received your letter and DVD. We made prints from the DVD you submitted. Upon review of the prints (documents it is determined as not pertinent to the issues on appeal. This is the exact wording and punctuation of the R&B section. See the last section? Everything I sent addressed PTSD. How can that evidence not be pertinent? There is no evidence section. They did not deny my claim of PTSD as a contributory cause of death, they only denied that colon cancer is not SC. I already knew that. I had sent 170 pages of evidence to them after the Court remanded my claim for further development. I sent the DVD as a second copy of the evidence a year later just to cover my a**, all data sent return receipt. The evidence included doctor nexus letters, and a dot by dot of history of my vet's avoidance to medical care, exhibited in chronic and acute treatments only. There was other important evidence. This is no different than the earier denials...they must think I am stupid! And they did an even worse job of looking at the new evidence (if they even did) because they did not list it! I feel my case is stronger than ever.... As far as the hearing loss claim goes, I don't ever expect to see anything meritous from that...especially after reading the posts here. Since he did not file for tinnitus, it is moot.

Yes, I am curious as well. Bell v derwinski applies to my late hubby's 90's application for sc for ptsd, as they failed to consider his counseling records.... he also applied in the 80's, and also got a rubber stamp denial with more counseling records in their hands. No C&P's either time back then...

Thanks for that...I still had my head in a black cloud of grief a few years ago. I at times now wonder how I had the where with all to file in the first place. But then, looking back at my hand written naive papers, no wonder they gave me a denial. I trusted them to do the right thing and help me~!

and what Kelly found and posted is exactly what just happened to me, among other things, in my denial.

http://www4.va.gov/vetapp08/files2/0811271.txt link to COVA remand Sorry, it is not brief...but I do not want to mis-state anything. I basically see that the RO at AMC in my current denial did not consider any of my ptsd evidence as of any value. I never once claimed tha colon cancer was SC, but that ptsd was and that it contributed to his death. I illustrated this with almost 30 years of medical records, most of which they gave me. In its September 2007 Joint Motion the Court requested that the Board provide more comprehensive discussion of the reasons and bases pertaining to its decision on further consideration of the claim, with reference to one or more sources of evidence indicating that service-connected PTSD may have been one of the contributing factors to the cause of the veteran's death. The case was then returned to the Board. Thereafter, the Board sent to the appellant an October 2007 notice letter informing her of the opportunity to submit additional argumentation and evidence prior to the readjudication of her claim within a 90-day time period. In response, she provided several items of evidence not previously on file, including but not limited to a detailed personal statement dated December 2007, statements from physicians and other treatment providers, and various medical journal articles. Moreover, she elected the option set forth upon the Board's October 2007 letter to have the case remanded to the RO as the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) to initially consider such evidence. Thus, a remand is necessary to implement this request. ... 1. Prior to any further adjudication of the claim for service connection for the cause of the veteran's death, the RO should send the appellant another VCAA letter in accordance with 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5102, 5103, and 5103A (West 2002), and all other applicable legal precedent. This additional letter must set forth discussion of the criteria for demonstrating entitlement to DIC benefits, as outlined in the Court's decision in Hupp v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 342 (2007). 2. The RO should readjudicate the claim for entitlement to service connection for the cause of the veteran's death. If the benefit sought is not granted, the appellant and her representative should be furnished with a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) that includes review of all additional evidence received from the appellant in December 2007, and then afforded an opportunity to respond before the file is returned to the Board for further consideration.

I contacted Mr. Carpenter, and his office set me up with a telephonic appointment for Nov. 12th. I am trusting you guys that he is the best!

john and wings: I did contact two of the lawyers listed in Larry's recent post; one has responded to me and asked me to call for a telephonic appointment. I will do that today. Wings, I made the DIC claim in 2004 and was denied. I appealed and was denied. MOPH picked up my case and took it to Court of Veterans Appeals where it was remanded (according to Berta, for VCAA violations) to AMC. All I know is, when it was remanded, I sent in 170 pages of material proof and a 16 page brief, all of which the AMC must have lost, because they did not address or list that material. I sent in a CD a year later which was a mirror of the same material just to cover my A**. AMC did not list the material on the CD or the other material - THEY SAID THEY PRINTED IT BUT IT WAS IRRELEVENT; all they said was it did not apply to my case....and ruled that the cancer death was not SC. I was claiming that a secondary condition - PTSD - was contributory to his death, and that material was I am guessing what they said did not apply to my case. THEY DID NOT RULE ON THE GUTS OF MY CASE, OR EVEN RECOGNIZE IT...

Wings, my only fear about going to the BVA is that it will be the last stop. This case has already been once through the VARO, BVA if that means the traveling board, and appealed to COVA then back to AOJ which is in this case the AMC. Is that correct about it being the last stop before a case is thrown out?

I have a new question. On the back page of the SSOC, it has the 30 day question issue. My question about this is as follows: I wonder if it of any advantage for me to wait out the 30 days and have the case go back to the BVA, as it says this will happen if I do not respond within that time frame. Waiting will get the case out of AMC, but will leave me with but one stop and only one more denial before the case is over. On the other hand, they did not list my pertinent evidence which I submitted to begin with, and my guts tell me to once again list it and include it page by page while asking for a Reconsideration. Any thoughts?

Congratulations - maybe your war is over. you used wisdom in your investments!

I am not giving up, let me make this clear. I did go to that post of Larry's and write to two different attorneys. Tomorrow after my kids leave I plan on covering every surface I have, and organizing like I have OCD the information I have gathered for my claim. Since there has been a beginning of order with the records, it will not be so hard as starting from scratch. I appreciate any other wisdom anybody may give me!

will do!

I also have already sent in the spoilation letter.... As far as a lawyer goes, I have also considered that...but I doubt there is one in Alaska. Do they practice across state lines?

Well, you see, DeltaJ, I already did that. I started with a claim in 2004, was denied, appealed to BVA, was denied, but it was remanded to AOJ by COVA back to AMC, who issued the latest denial. It says in the papers they sent me that the PTSD information I send to them is not relevant to the DIC case...and I think it is, and that was the basis of PTSD as a secondary cause of death...and his oncology doctor put in on his death certificate as well as stating that his PTSD had an effect on his attitude toward his health care. All the information I sent to them was in the VA files... and I showed them a dot by dot pattern of behavior where my vet used avoidance for his health care for all but chronic instances, or injuries that spanned from the 70's to his death. They didn't follow their own rules!

AMC came through with a SSOC in todays mail. Once again, I am denied for DIC. They did not list my evidence. (spoilation?) Rubber stamp again! They did not address my issue - that PTSD contributed to my hubbys death. (denial made while not condiserating my position) As an aside, they mentioned the DVD I sent them with the second set of papers but did not list the evidence, and never mentioned the original documents I sent...(spoilation?) I have thirty days to respond, which I will, with the full gamut of information I have already supplied. They said if I do not respond within 30 days, they will send the file back to the BVA. Is that good for me or bad? GRRR I am angry. Should I ask for a reconsideration, or make a NOD? I had already connected the dots, supplied IMO for PTSD, and copied them with their documents pertaining to his PTSD. My friends here are telling me to get out of the loop and get congressional intervention, even though I told them about the retribution that it can cause.... any thoughts? Thanks, please forgive me for venting, AkWidow

that's about a 6.8% increase.... Thanks for the info