Fishing Expedition

[Josephine]

Hi,

I received a letter from the AMC stating letter going to my Board Certified Internist of 30 years.

I did not receive any copy or information as to what they wanted from him.

He received his letter this past Tuesday.

I saw him on Wednesday for my usual appointment and he told me bits and pieces. This is the jist of what they wanted to know.

Why in your opinion as an Internist are you qualifed or more qualifed than a psychiatrist to treat this patient and what is her current diagnosis and past diagnosis and what are your credentials to treat her?

He went into depth about my diagnosis and his credentials. He read me bits and pieces of his letter,and mailed it immediately.

I am not sure that anyone knows the answer to this question, but thought that I would ask?

My question is The AMC sent me another " Statement in Support of Claim to file out.

Here we go:

I filed for benefits in 1978 denied.

I filed again in 2001 - denied

2004 - I acquired the Psychiatric records from the Archives. New and Material evidence to re-opened all claims.

The DRO had all of my post medical records from 1965 - 2004

The DRO had letter from my private doctor.

The DRO had the " New and Material Evidence"

The DRO sent me for a C&P October 18, 2004

Diagnosis - Generalized Anxiety not otherwise Specifed with Depression.

More likely than not or possibly the result this veterans anxiety with depression began in service with

Complete rationale for decision.

When the DRO ignored this information and chose to seek another C&P 5 months later for same and never found fault with the first C&P.

Does this come into play.

Mariano V Principi Vet. App 305, 312

Cautioning against seeking addtitional medical evidence where favorable evidence in the record is un-rebutted?

Thanks.

Josephine

Edited October 13, 2007 by Josephine

[Ron II]

I look forward to seeing how this is resolved. Although I do not have a service-connected disability for

depression, I am curious about the VA's decision to question your internist. My internist also prescribes

anti-depressants.

[Josephine]

I look forward to seeing how this is resolved. Although I do not have a service-connected disability for

depression, I am curious about the VA's decision to question your internist. My internist also prescribes

anti-depressants.

Thanks Manitou Sprgs,

I am sure that you feel confident in taking this medicine from your doctor, as I have for the last 30 years.

Being that it is the " Rating Supervisor" asking these questions, this shall be decided very shortly.

Always,

Joephine

[Wings]

x

x

x

I believe the 'Statement in Support of Claim' is a Standard Form, sent out routinely. It's an opportunity to send additional evidence - if you have anything to add - but it's not a requirement at this stage of your claim. If you have additional evidence, send it; if not, ask them to decide on the current evidence. Is the weight of the evidence in equipose?

*The basic three requirements for prevailing on a claim for service connection:

(1) medical evidence of a current disability;

(2) medical or, in certain circumstances, lay evidence of in-service aggravation of a disease or injury; and

(3) medical evidence of a nexus between the claimed in-service injury or disease and a current disability.

I certainly do not understand why your Internist would refuse you a copy of his letter. You are certainly, and most lawfully enntitled to a copy. Use the FOIA to obtain a copy. Hopefully, your Internist had something to add to the weight of your claim.

If you are going to cite case law, I would use a shotgun approach: list all laws and regulations that support your claim; just like the VA does when they deny a claim.

Remember "the veteran is not required to plead his/her claim with such [legal or medical] specificity, but VA is obligated to apply all relevant law and regulation regardless of how the claim is identified". See for example Roberson v. Principi, 251 F.3d 1378, 1383-84 (Fed. Cir. 2001). http://www.va.gov/vetapp04/files/0404870.txt

A disability may be service-connected if it results from an

injury or disease incurred in, or aggravated by, military

service. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303

(2003).

When all the evidence is assembled, VA is responsible for

determining whether the evidence supports the claim or is in

relative equipoise, with the appellant prevailing in either

event, or whether a preponderance of the evidence is against

a claim, in which case, the claim is denied. Gilbert v.

Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 4.3

(2003).

The Secretary shall consider all information and lay and

medical evidence of record in a case before the Secretary

with respect to benefits under laws administered by the

Secretary. When there is an approximate balance of positive

and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the

determination of a matter, the Secretary shall give the

benefit of the doubt to the claimant. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107.

Following the point at which it is determined that all

relevant evidence has been obtained, it is the Board's

principal responsibility to assess the credibility, and

therefore the probative value of proffered evidence of record

in its whole. Owens v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 429, 433 (1995);

see Elkins v. Gober, 229 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2000); Madden

v. Gober, 125 F.3d 1477, 1481 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (and cases

cited therein); Guimond v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 69, 72 (1993);

Hensley v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 155, 161 (1993).

AND SO ON !!

ROCK ON !! ~Wings

[john999]

Josephine

I think one reason the VA is playing hardball with you is the potential for a large retro they do not want to pay. You still have to beat them based on the regs, however. That is all that you as a vet have to work with is the regs and the way you use them.

[Josephine]

x

x

x

I believe the 'Statement in Support of Claim' is a Standard Form, sent out routinely. It's an opportunity to send additional evidence - if you have anything to add - but it's not a requirement at this stage of your claim. If you have additional evidence, send it; if not, ask them to decide on the current evidence. Is the weight of the evidence in equipose?

*The basic three requirements for prevailing on a claim for service connection:

(1) medical evidence of a current disability;

(2) medical or, in certain circumstances, lay evidence of in-service aggravation of a disease or injury; and

(3) medical evidence of a nexus between the claimed in-service injury or disease and a current disability.

I certainly do not understand why your Internist would refuse you a copy of his letter. You are certainly, and most lawfully enntitled to a copy. Use the FOIA to obtain a copy. Hopefully, your Internist had something to add to the weight of your claim.

If you are going to cite case law, I would use a shotgun approach: list all laws and regulations that support your claim; just like the VA does when they deny a claim.

Remember "the veteran is not required to plead his/her claim with such [legal or medical] specificity, but VA is obligated to apply all relevant law and regulation regardless of how the claim is identified". See for example Roberson v. Principi, 251 F.3d 1378, 1383-84 (Fed. Cir. 2001). http://www.va.gov/vetapp04/files/0404870.txt

A disability may be service-connected if it results from an

injury or disease incurred in, or aggravated by, military

service. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303

(2003).

When all the evidence is assembled, VA is responsible for

determining whether the evidence supports the claim or is in

relative equipoise, with the appellant prevailing in either

event, or whether a preponderance of the evidence is against

a claim, in which case, the claim is denied. Gilbert v.

Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 4.3

(2003).

The Secretary shall consider all information and lay and

medical evidence of record in a case before the Secretary

with respect to benefits under laws administered by the

Secretary. When there is an approximate balance of positive

and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the

determination of a matter, the Secretary shall give the

benefit of the doubt to the claimant. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107.

Following the point at which it is determined that all

relevant evidence has been obtained, it is the Board's

principal responsibility to assess the credibility, and

therefore the probative value of proffered evidence of record

in its whole. Owens v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 429, 433 (1995);

see Elkins v. Gober, 229 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2000); Madden

v. Gober, 125 F.3d 1477, 1481 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (and cases

cited therein); Guimond v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 69, 72 (1993);

Hensley v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 155, 161 (1993).

AND SO ON !!

ROCK ON !! ~Wings

Wings,

I think it is time for them to decide this claim. I don't understand too much of what is going on.

My representative received a letter, which I did not receive. I may be going for another C&P.

I called and ask the Supervisor, what next and she said, " If your doctor can produce" you will not be going for another one, so we have not sent you a letter.

I don't know how and what is going on.

Thanks for your time,

Josephine

[Chuck75]

Did the DRO have a current written letter (form) that you signed giving permission for them to obtain medical information and records? I have seen forms "gundecked" that contain a photocopied signature from an older letter/form giving consent. (The VA didn't do it, a state VRO did.)

I suppose it might be possible to get a copy of the letter from the Dr., and depending on what it says, go further with it.

If the information in your file dates back to 2004, The VA is obviously using the "current medical information" scheme to see if any newer info might affect you claim, and an excuse to further delay resolution. It also sounds like they are obviously trying to rebut your Drs. previous medical opinion.

I'd be tempted to ask for the credentials of the VA psychiatrist involved.

Just remember "fighting city hall" is an uphill battle.

Hi,

I received a letter from the AMC stating letter going to my Board Certified Internist of 30 years.

I did not receive any copy or information as to what they wanted from him.

He received his letter this past Tuesday.

I saw him on Wednesday for my usual appointment and he told me bits and pieces. This is the jist of what they wanted to know.

Why in your opinion as an Internist are you qualifed or more qualifed than a psychiatrist to treat this patient and what is her current diagnosis and past diagnosis and what are your credentials to treat her?

He went into depth about my diagnosis and his credentials. He read me bits and pieces of his letter,and mailed it immediately.

I am not sure that anyone knows the answer to this question, but thought that I would ask?

My question is The AMC sent me another " Statement in Support of Claim to file out.

Here we go:

I filed for benefits in 1978 denied.

I filed again in 2001 - denied

2004 - I acquired the Psychiatric records from the Archives. New and Material evidence to re-opened all claims.

The DRO had all of my post medical records from 1965 - 2004

The DRO had letter from my private doctor.

The DRO had the " New and Material Evidence"

The DRO sent me for a C&P October 18, 2004

Diagnosis - Generalized Anxiety not otherwise Specifed with Depression.

More likely than not or possibly the result this veterans anxiety with depression began in service with

Complete rationale for decision.

When the DRO ignored this information and chose to seek another C&P 5 months later for same and never found fault with the first C&P.

Does this come into play.

Mariano V Principi Vet. App 305, 312

Cautioning against seeking addtitional medical evidence where favorable evidence in the record is un-rebutted?

Thanks.

Josephine