Lou

[windy city]

Just got of the phone with the Dav rep. talked about my denial for Lou of lower extremities and his reply for the denial was that a person haves to be wheelchair bound or be an amputee. I informed him that a wear bilateral leg braces and that one of my service connected disability was causing lou and his reply good luck because it was not going to get nowhere. What a way to help these are people that you pay a life membership to join the Dav and this is how they help you. I requested to change this guy and was told they could not. Ever since I have this guy is nothing but denials I feel he is all for the VA and nothing for the vet. Need advice on this one from people that are experts in this area and like to know if this guy right or wrong and a possible way to get rid of this guy so he will not be my rep. at the Dav.

[Testvet]

Life memberships are nothing more than "donations" they don't buy you better repesentation. You can always revoke your POA and get another service organization to represent you. But Loss of use is pretty much restricted to paralyzed limbs or the need of a wheel chair for locomotion My heart disease keeps me from walking and I am restricted to a power chair for movement over 100 feet and use a walker for the short distance any walking gives me shortness of breath and chest pains and until I get the cardiovascular problems SC I won't even waste my time fighting for loss of use....if you are mobile using leg braces then you are disabled but not considered to be in the category of "loss of use" they work just not as well as they used to

Edited October 10, 2007 by Testvet

[ammawa]

I know your feeling...I had VFW in the Local VARO and they weren't any count at all...I switched to DAV and they are the same... I owe a little bit more befor my lifetime dues are paid...I called the DAV head quarters and told them that I wasn't giving them one more red cent until I got every penny that the VA owes me. and that's just how I feel.

But on your issue itself...I wouldn't care what he said (DAV)I would pursue the issue at hand. And disability has to be evaluated on pain, range of motion and other factors as well. I would argue/ and file for depression becasue all of this is noticably causing you be become irratated over the whole mess...

I was in a similar situation with my claim...I was given some good advice and filed depression as a secondary to my already service connected disabilities and got 50% right off the bat for a mood disorder. Becasue over the years I have developed a bad disposition as to any and all VA VARO staff and others because I have been through the ringer with VA since my injuries. And In the past I have experienced many time when i could do nothing but wait for utility folks to cut off water, electric and other utilities...as well as not being able to feed my family.

But If you feel strongly about your Lou issue then pursue it to the end.

Like my claim for the IU back to 1992 (already 100% but they (VA) paid me from 2004 because they said it was the date of the exam. That's bull because in 1992 is when my disability prohibited me from working gainful employment. And I will appeal it until they give it all to me.

[windy city]

I know your feeling...I had VFW in the Local VARO and they weren't any count at all...I switched to DAV and they are the same... I owe a little bit more befor my lifetime dues are paid...I called the DAV head quarters and told them that I wasn't giving them one more red cent until I got every penny that the VA owes me. and that's just how I feel.

But on your issue itself...I wouldn't care what he said (DAV)I would pursue the issue at hand. And disability has to be evaluated on pain, range of motion and other factors as well. I would argue/ and file for depression becasue all of this is noticably causing you be become irratated over the whole mess...

I was in a similar situation with my claim...I was given some good advice and filed depression as a secondary to my already service connected disabilities and got 50% right off the bat for a mood disorder. Becasue over the years I have developed a bad disposition as to any and all VA VARO staff and others because I have been through the ringer with VA since my injuries. And In the past I have experienced many time when i cthere is a possibility I can grtould do nothing but wait for utility folks to cut off water, electric and other utilities...as well as not being able to feed my family.

But If you feel strongly about your Lou issue then pursue it to the end.

Like my claim for the IU back to 1992 (already 100% but they (VA) paid me from 2004 because they said it was the date of the exam. That's bull because in 1992 is when my disability prohibited me from working gainful employment. And I will appeal it until they give it all to me.

You are right I should not let him discourage me because I know that if I appeal it there is a possibility that I can get it. I have read many cases that have gone to the BVA and have been awarded without having to be wheelchair bound. I know that I will be alone on this one because the DAV rep. haves is mind set on not arguing this one. But I have you guys that probably are or have gone through the same dilema in which I find myself with this individual and are able to give me good advice.Thanks

[entropent]

Just got of the phone with the Dav rep. talked about my denial for Lou of lower extremities and his reply for the denial was that a person haves to be wheelchair bound or be an amputee. I informed him that a wear bilateral leg braces and that one of my service connected disability was causing lou and his reply good luck because it was not going to get nowhere. What a way to help these are people that you pay a life membership to join the Dav and this is how they help you. I requested to change this guy and was told they could not. Ever since I have this guy is nothing but denials I feel he is all for the VA and nothing for the vet. Need advice on this one from people that are experts in this area and like to know if this guy right or wrong and a possible way to get rid of this guy so he will not be my rep. at the Dav.

loss of use requires evidence that the foot has no more function than that which would be provided if the foot were amputated and a prosthesis was used. generally speaking, loss of use can be argued for if there is insufficient function left in the foot for it to "push off" while walking.

[Guest morgan]

loss of use requires evidence that the foot has no more function than that which would be provided if the foot were amputated and a prosthesis was used. generally speaking, loss of use can be argued for if there is insufficient function left in the foot for it to "push off" while walking.

entropent,

How does LOU compare to preclusion of locomotion? And are you saying LOU of lower extremeties requires the feet to not function for "push off?"? Or are you talking about loss of use of a foot.

If I'm understanding this correctly, LOU could not be granted if severe lung or heart disease precludes walking more than a few steps; for instance taking a few steps to transfer to and from wheelchair, but having no ability to functionally ambulate. Is that right?

Does loss of use pertain only to foot function in granting the auto grant and SAH? What determines that the foot cannot push off?

Edited October 11, 2007 by morgan

[sixthscents]

Well if entropent is saying that... which is inferred I think, he is right. He is quoting CFR 38's basic requirements. Essentially Loss of Use is established when the ability for foreward propulsion is the same is an amputee. That does NOT mean you have to BE an amputee, just essentially have the same amount of function.

Generally, or in almost ALL cases loss of use determination requires establishment of nerve damage that is shown by the administration of an EMG. Now there are exceptions to everything... and an example would be someone who has a problem in the thalamus of the brain... this is not detectable on an EMG, but if this issue was established, and a doctor provided an IMO stating that the thalamus could cause this, well the rater may not approve it, but I think it would win at BVA if sufficient evidence was presented to show that there were essentially the same physical effects as a nerve or spinal chord injury.

I believe loss of use of a foot or feet is essentially the same, except the conditions exist bilaterally. I dont think that lung function, heart disease would be considered, or at least it would be a battle to GET it considered as a causation.

Windy, your DAV rep is incorrect. Period. Loss of use is not just for amputees. I am not an amputee yet I have loss of use in both lower legs. In short your DAV guy needs to actually read the reg, because he is just quoting what his experience has been, NOT what CFR 38 allows.

Morgan, propulsion of the foot is defined as the ability of the foot to push foreward and to propel the leg foreward thru plantar, and dorsi-flexion. The absence (or diminished capacity) of the ability to plantar or dorsi-flex the foot is grounds for loss of use if evidence shows that there is damage to the nerve which controls this function. CFR 38 does NOT state this but essentially in MOST cases an EMG showing paralysis of the anterior tibialis, and/or common peroneal nerve is essential in granting loss of use. Other SIGNIFICANT symptoms include loss or diminished deep tendon reflexes. Such as ankle jerk, knee jerk etc.

Again, there are ALWAYS exceptions and Windy, I think you are one. I have loooked at you info and I would certainly take it to BVA. I think your rater used the common requirements, and since they had not seen your situation simply denied it. I think your case has a LOT of merit, its just not the common nerve damage.

The auto grant and SAH grant require different things... I would suggest you look them up and see if they fit your case. Loss of use is NOT required, for either... an example Miniere's syndrom is an organic illness that would be a reasonable basis for SAH I think. Loss of use is a great help in getting these grants approved, I have both - but it is not absolutely essential.

Edited October 11, 2007 by sixthscents