hjunker

Schauba Go ahead and appeal your rating. History is full of soldiers who LIED on there application to enter the service and they served with distinction. I am sure many of us know individuals who were underage or hid arrest records and served with honor. Your long service record should override the denials. Appeal based on medical evidence and you should win.

That would not even be an issue. They don’t sit there trying to see who send in the information at exactly 60 days. You will be lucky if they look at it in six months. If the information is there, they use it in your claim if not then they cannot use it. The 60 day limit only means that they will let the claim sit without action so you can send information to support your claim. If nothing is received they (MIGHT) move on your claim without the additional information but if you send the info within one year, they will go back to see if the additional information support a different rating.

To send e-mail to a member just click on the name, and then look on the right and click on send e-mail. Your e-mail address will show up on the sent mail. To test the system, click on your own name and send yourself an e-mail.

Go right ahead and spend your energy in trying to move that mountain. In the interim, forget about and don’t pursue the benefits made available to you for injuries and diseases resulting from military service. In any major task, the rule is to pick the low hanging fruits first. Prioritize the harder tasks and so you can continue to progress. In this case, work on obtaining the benefits first. Abolishing the FD will do nothing to replace the health of that Nurse. Additionally, the doctrine protected that nurse and it also protects all other military members. Feres refers to the name of a decision handed down by the United States Supreme Court* in 1950 which held that soldiers who were serving in the armed forces could not sue the United States for injuries received while on active duty. The opinion actually covers three different fact situations: in the Feres case itself, the soldier had burned to death in a barracks fire started by a defective heating plant; in the companion case of Griggs v. United States, the soldier was alleged to have died from medical malpractice by army surgeons; and in the case of Jefferson v. United States, the plaintiff, while on active duty in the army, had undergone an operation on his abdomen. Eight months later, after being discharged, he had to undergo another operation due to recurring pain in his abdomen. After opening him up, the surgeons pulled out a towel, 18 inches wide by 30 inches long, that had stenciled on it: "Medical Department U. S. Army"!

Why is this veteran on a "Military Pension" and not on a VA Disability. You should check that out. The hiatal hernia that requires sugery as a minimum will be 30% and that is not including the additional residual complications that you have mentioned. Forget about moving mountains in the Feres Doctrine, focus on your (her) immediate problem.

What reason did they give for the effective date. Have you had the claim in effect for 19years or did you file the current claim in Sept 2005? If you are going to file a notice of disagreement (NOD), what date should be the effective date??????? If the effective date is 19 years ago as you might be suggesting your entitlements would be appx $22,000. Is that worth fighting for?

Tim I believe you are very tuned to the process and you have also received some excellent advice from other members. I want to stick my two cents worth in. If you have not already sent your NOD I would suggest delaying as long as possible so you can collect additional evidence and lay the ground work for it. As others mentioned, you need to continue to receive treatment on your disabilities and now that you fully understand how the disabilities are rated and your current symptoms, you need to make sure the doctors hear you and make sure they write your complaints in your treatment records. That way, when the NOD review is conducted or when they send you the SOC you will have documents to support your response. I believe too often we are inclined to provide an immediate response. When we do that, we are asking them to rely on the evidence already at their disposal. But if my advice is sound, in your delay, you might gather just enough evidence to show them that your disability is a little worst than it was when they conducted your C&P. The best chance you have in getting an immediate increase is in the initial NOD stage, I believe once VA digs in to support their original rating, you might experience problems in having them to back down. When you go to the medical treatment facility, have a list of everything you want to discuss with the doctor especially those service connected disabilities. No matter what, tell the doctor what is going on with the service connected disabilities and make sure you see them writing your comments in the record. Down the road, that information will help. Lack of treatment or comments is going to hurt. The reason I say the above is because often we go to the doctor if we are not hurting that very moment and they ask how we are doing we say FINE, GOOD etc. We forget to tell them about the problems we had last week. When you read the doctor treatment notes you will see “patient in for scheduled appointment, said he felt fine, denied this, denied that, only complained of --------“ When you file for an increase, this stuff hurts. That’s my two cents.

Get both vets to enroll in a VA Counseling Center. Some have excellent counselors

I see this may be a dead subject but couldn’t help from responding after reading it this morning. I don’t understand how someone could be providing advice to fellow veterans and fail to understand the basic principle that: “““Veterans may be entitled to VA disability compensation for ANY MEDICAL CONDITION or injury that was incurred in or aggravated by their military service if they were released from active military duty with anything other than a dishonorable discharge.””” For someone to say this: “““For example, one could come down with cancer while in the military and said cancer could lead to a medical discharge, but that doesn't mean the military "caused" the cancer in the first place””” suggest lack of understanding of the above. Then follow up with: “I'm a nurse by profession, so please don't talk down to me about cancer. Cancer is not CAUSED by the military and to insinuate otherwise is lunacy “ would suggest the need the for additional training. Tell that to the thousands who participated in nuclear testing and tell that to other service members who have occupations or exposures to cancer causing agents. Service members are exposed to some of the most horrific conditions in the world. Some service members have been inadvertently exposed to health robbing conditions long before the general public or medical science suggest the exposure is a health risk. Some must be exposed to such conditions under emergency conditions due to spontaneous responses to accidents or other world events. Responders should not become offended with more experienced members when they point out others limited knowledge of qualifying disabilities. In this case and other causes, it doesn’t matter if the Cancer was caused by military service, the premise that the military caused the cancer or aggravated the cancer will apply and the evidence would provide the degree of compensation. If I receive advice form a lawyer for several complicated issues and then one day I mention the constitution and the lawyer say he has no knowledge of said document, I would suspect all his previous advice. That said, why would someone come here to provide advice or to assist vets in obtaining benefits and fail to understand the above basic premise that the service member entered service WHOLE and discharged broken in some way? Congress said they would pay for the broken parts.

VA granted me a CUE for vision problems in 1999 stemming from a complaint filed in 1992. I believe the C&P examiners overlooked the extensive treatment that I had received in service to include referrals to Walter Reed and Bethesda Naval Hospital in the DC area. So, take a close look at what’s in your file and what the examiners are saying in their report to the raters. I believe after I sent in a NOD after I reopened the claim in 1998, the rater reviewed my file then found the incorrect reports from the C&P exams. They called me at home, offered to increase and then sent out the agreed increase site a CUE. I just reviewed my c-file and the caller noted in his records the date he called me, what we discussed, and our decision. I would suggest you obtain a copy of your C-file and it will provide valuable information to assist you with your NOD and if appropriate they will see the CUE.

Looks like a good claim. Follow the advice of your VSO and read all you can find regarding the disability so you will know parity whey you receive it.