ptsd Bva-amc 2 C&p Exam Same Day.

[lu12]

Berta thanks for u reply; first in regards to my cervical spine c&p exam the examiner never performed any kind of physical nor medical evaluation. What he did was just ask one question which it was related to my 1998 soc response to the varo. He did not even ask about all new ime`s = nexus opinions - and material evidence on record and ignored by the varo and by the 1998 first cervical spine c&p examiner evaluation. 1. smr evidence “back was not well evaluated to make a determination” did mean anything. 2. First 1989 vae and acknowledged later by another 1989 rd for voc-rehab, state that with in 12 mo. pp; etiology of the vet back pain at medical - discharge and at the First vae “were both un-clear”. But what really blow my mind was the fact that this c&p examiner did not wanted to reconciled or understood the BVA remanded instructions and actions to be specifically followed. Nor with the ime`s = nexus opinions He just said that b/c, I wrote that I claimed and sought medical treatment as chief complaint through the VHA for s-c for my cervical spine condition in 1996 there is nothing that he can do for me. Geeeeez, I can bet that this Dr. did not revise carefully enough my c-file.

If the 1996 claim decision is a final one there might be CUE potential- hard to say- How can I really know VARO from 1996 to 1997 they never answer me this claim in any type -form or shape. As for this matter I’ve submitted evidence of this in multiple occasions

Evidence of the record ignored in multiple occasions including when the issue was first claimed also ignored can be consider as CUE?????

at some point this claim was pending (I think)after the VCAA became law- did you ever get a VCAA letter? Yes, I did, I even claim assistance for my 1998 depression issue: they never gave me that assistance b/c they said that it seems that I was pretty knowledgeable when I cited and claimed my rights under the 2000 VCAA law. Then again I claimed for depression in 1998 and the VARO processed my claim for Dysthymia instead of Depression, could this fact also mean another reason to file a possible CUE???

BVA decision docket number: 98-17645A. I hope that this can help other veteran’s when it comes to any GI-ISSUES due to medications prescribed as “NSAID” for s-c conditions The AMC recently granted me a 30% for this issue. Decision date: Oct 30, 2007 and Effective date is: Jan29, 1998. Not considering intestinal problems such as: constipation (ibs) and hemorroids.

Double whammy: BVA-AMC 2 C&P Exam, same day.

First of, thank you for this site… it is truly helpful. It does make a difference, to every service member, especially for our guys coming out of Iraq and Afghanistan. I was set up for two C&P evaluations Dec 10^th 2007. 1st Exam for a cervical spine disorders the second evaluation for this issue, first done back in 1998. 2. Exam for an acquired psychiatric disorder the same as issue num. one - second C&P evaluation done since 1998 this means 9 years in this or-deal. These two C&P Evaluations were order by the (AMC) Washington, DC not by the Puerto Rico, VARO and remanded by the VBA 2006 decision where I was granted service-connection for a GI condition.

Now as for my 2007 cervical spine C&P exam, here is what happened: Attending Medical Examiner seems like a nice person I mean not like a (USMC) Drill Instructor type of a guy anyway, he went on and ask me the reason for me being there, I said I was set up for a cervical spine re-evaluation an issue claimed since 1996 as service-connected condition secondary to my lumbar spine and my right knee disabilities. Now here is what are the most interesting and an unusual part of this new cervical spine evaluation. First the Examiner did not perform any kind of physical evaluation on my cervical spine and upper extremities as directed by the (BVA). Second my c-file was there (ok), he told me that he reviewed my c-file and said to me that there is nothing that he can do for me b/c of an statement of the case response that I made to the VARO back in 1998 were I stated the fact that I did requested the VHA to medically treat my cervical spine as chief complaint for the fist time in 1996 apart from my lumbar and knee chief complaints, so first of we where debating about my 1998 (SOC) response to the VARO then he goes to said that b/c of that fact he could not relate this issue to my active service period and secondly b/c since I were medically discharge in 1989 there was no medical evidence of treatment until 1996.

Respectfully I said that most of the information that he referred was incorrect. I wet on to explain that during active service the medical attention was given to my lumbar spine and my knee conditions, that 1. From the SMR there is evidence that state that my "back condition were not adequately evaluated to make a determination" just low back pain. 2. Also and most important that from my c-file a 1990 Hawaii, VARO (rating decision) for (voc-rehab.) purpose; their statement also included this: "Although veteran was seen in service for low chronic back pain, complaints, a definite diagnosis of a back disability was not made on discharge; etiology of veteran's back pain on a VAE 12-7-89 was also unclear.

Also there is evidence that from my Social Security Disability Benefits were due b/c of my cervical-lumbar spine and knee conditions since 1994 that in 1995 there was an Private Independent Medical Evaluation performed that documented that there was pain radiating through back muscles to Nuchal Region. That in another C&P Evaluation in 1996 there is evidence of complaints of cervical pain and anxiety. But still C&P Examiner could not find a relationship to my active service period.

In Feb 1997 I was involved in a motor vehicle accident where my car was impact from behind, I said that maybe that was the reason for the VARO denied my claims and if that was the reason respectfully I reminded the C&P Examiner, that accordingly to the VBA decision; additional medical evidence treatment and complaints were submitted well before the 1997 motor vehicle accident (MVA). That the factual basis upon the June 1998 opinions were rendered has change, the BOARD finds that the claims must be remanded for additional examination and etiological opinion. Also base on medical evidence that demonstrates that the veteran complained of neck pain, in addition to pain and numbness radiating from his neck into his arms in September 1995. A September 2003 (IMexperts-IMopinions) relates the veteran's spine condition to his service-connected orthopedic disabilities. C&P Examiner seem like he did not care about it. I went on to show additional independent medical evidence and opinions not mentioned by the BVA in which there are various professional medical opinions relating my cervical-spine conditions that was as a result of the traumas and injuries suffered while on active service period. Again The C&P Examiner seem like he did not care about it; finally I reminded the Examiner that there is lots of objective evidence not taken in to account and that also accordingly to the BVA they ask for a 50% or grater probability that this issue is related to either: 1. Period of active service period or to 2. His service connected low back disability. C&P Examiner seem he did not understand these two facts. "Unless the (AMC) had requested the C&P Examiner to follow other actions – rather of the BVA remanded actions.

The BVA did ask from the Examiner to specifically address and reconcile this opinion with the various opinions of records finding that the veteran's cervical spine disorder is related to his low back disability and injuries he sustained in service. If the examiner feels that the requested opinion cannot be given without resort to speculation, the examiner should so state.

Now for the acquired psychiatric disorder issue and second C&P evaluation done since 1998 - 9 years in this or-deal. Went in to the examiners room, psychiatric (she) started asking questions, I did remembered this psychiatric an old lady that she had see me before for Psy treatment at an OPC back in 2000-2202. as the question continues she did remember me and started pretty much screaming, and complaining b/c she could not performed the Psy-Evaluation due to conflict of interest. Up until that point to be honest I was curious, pleased and at the same time I was getting pretty mad. I explain my self; first; I sense the possibility of trouble and it did happen. Second y 2001 I was refereed by a private psychiatric to VA Dr. Petersons b/c I could not continued the private-spy due to the b/c how expensive it was the tx: even though I had my Medicare coverage, any way the private Psy made a medical certificate and referral along with copies of my medical records that included: depression and ptsd; well guess what VA Psy.

Never revised nor discussed any off the private medical evidence that I gave to her to also make them part of my medical records at the VA clinic. Continued the tx: but it was like an empty feeling coming out of the VHA-Psy office every time. Back then all she cares was about wife, kids, living conditions and that he refer about his chief complaints. All she wrote was the same thing every time. One paragraph, 10 sentences. MDD-NOS GAF-60. Now b/c of this I was released that she never got to perform my evaluation. Any way I got reschedule for Dec 27, 2007. Don't know what is going to happen, maybe the same as my cervical evaluation.

As for my GI issue the (AMC) they first request a C&P evaluation for rating purpose it took from Aug 2006 to Oct 2007 got a 30%rating. And now early Dec 2007 they started working for these other issue. Why not all at the same time? My GI Disorders experience as well as my Psy. Disorders they are pretty much on the same, same and same track, hx and tx dates: and all evidence of sings and symptoms (S&S) can be trace from active service period and from the 12 mo. Presumptive Period. But the BVA decide to remand this issue.

For my cervical spine issue, what about when the board does not make reference to private medical evidence IME medical evaluation; like for example they mentioned a 2003 IME medical evaluation, but fail to weigh in on a 2004 new IME medical evaluation, evidence submitted to the RO.

I claimed s-c for my cervical spine conditions in 1996, no action from the VARO in 1997 went on with a copy of my 1996 claim, no action from the VARO. Finally by 1998 they started to work on my claim – but the effective date is 1998. Also for this issue: SMR, C-FILE and PRIVATE MEDICAL EVIDENCE that were surrendered as material evidence were not included on any of the following VARO document's 1) RD, 1) SOC and 2) SSOC; clear evidences as to the fact that the VARO fail to incorporate in the EVIDENCE AND REASON AND BASIS - SECTIONS; objective, substantial and persuasive evidence. VARO listed as evidence some Private (IM experts-IM opinions). But they fails to weigh in or discusses there opinions'. Are these probable or enough reasons to file for, CUE-NOD base on a NOVO-REVIEW if this case might still prevails as negative decision?

[lu12]

Berta,

through the dav rep in 1998 we requested s-c for the GI disorders secondary to s-c conditions not in 1993 . varo denied GI, PSY and the 1996 cervical spine issues all together. soon we file a nod in 1998 and requested a local hearing. with new evidence on hand the hearing date and ready before it the reviewed officer chat with my ser. rep about my case since was next the ro reviewed officer told my rep that he did remembered my case and if I had brought with me new evidence then the hearing was not necessary.

My rep tells me all this and I said no hearing need it? he replied to me nop - see my mistake shouldn't have trust that final approached to my case b/c my case it went dead till 2003. when the VARO wrote telling me they started working on my case again - that they re-open my claim. Well from 98 to 99 every contact to my rep he always told me they varo were working on my case and that it appears that it was going to take some time. see got tired trying f/u`s with my rep and the varo. I did not let my claims to be close; we answered - nod and appeared before the hearing that never took place.

Then I hope u understand my thought's about the ser rep... there are some ser rep and there are ser rep. My GI issue was claimed as secondary to my s-c conditions.

On Dec 27, 2007, I had 2 c&p exam the cervical spine exam, where the examiner never performed any physical-medical evaluation on me, did not care about the IME NEXUS pinion`s, and most amassing was the fact that the examiner did not understood the BVA remand instructions and requested actions.

The PSY exam, started but could not be finished b/c the attending psy. examiner treated me before, back in 2000-2002. see best that could ever happened she yield there was a conflicts right there. She was a 10 sentences -1 paragraph every time.

I'm OK with my GI - EED I'm not OK with the AMC 30% rating. The AMC did not care about nor weight in a better and more complete picture about my GI disorders 1999 Private IME-IMO dx`s: well documented by the 2006 BVA decision; apart from my wheel documented constipation and hemorrhoids dx: since the first day after my knee major reconstruction while on active service in 1988.

Consumed NSAID med. during and after active service. I will consider the BVA Ombusman option Right after they finish my c&p exam and the AMC surrender their final opinions on the other two issues left

[carlie]

lu12,

You posted,

"On Dec 27, 2007, I had 2 c&p exam the cervical spine exam..."

We haven't reached this date yet.

carlie

[lu12]

lu12,

You posted,

"On Dec 27, 2007, I had 2 c&p exam the cervical spine exam..."

We haven't reached this date yet.

carlie

correct Carlie, Dec 10, 2007 I had both exam 1. cervical spine disorders 2. psy. disorders. last one was cancel and reschedule for Dec 27, 2007.

Thank,

Lg

[Berta]

Yes- best to take those C & Ps and then see what the RO says-at this point---

"Then I hope u understand my thought's about the ser rep... there are some ser rep and there are ser rep"

indeed I do-

some sit around scratching their rear ends just waiting for their retirement date-

others act like God and answer a question from a vet on their claim- with complete confidence and authority- but actually with anything they can make up on the spot-

I think mine was playing footsy wootsy with the DRO-

he told me one thing after the DRO conference and the SOC said something completely different went on.

The vets around here used to say some of these SOs were in bed with the VA- I think some of them as just plain incompetent, lazy, or completely unaggressive with the ROs when they have the chance to be-

I could write a book on this stuff-

I DO BELIEVE there are some great ones- I heard more compliments today from a vet who personally knows of the vet rep I am interviewing tomorrow night at SVR podcast-

vets show-

If they only wore those buttons I mention here a lot-

Dumb or Smart buttons-

then disabled vets would not have one hand tied behind their backs when they get someone on their POA who is supposed to watch their backs and prosecute their claims to the fullest extent-and if they dont -the VA itself can tie their other hand behind their back with their manipulations of the vet's evidence- if they even read it at all-

What a set up-

no one accounts for lousy representation (I think Congress should oversee the congressionally chartered vet orgs) and then no one really accounts for the VA claims process-

and you men and women have to get VA -paid doctors to perform the C & Ps that control your claims.

Colonel David Hunt recently interviewed on TV -in talking about the disabled men and women from Iraq and Afganistan said it all point blank-

He said "WE SUCK!"

He meant by WE every single entity that controls disabled military personnel and veterans-and also by WE-anyone who is indifferent and apathetic to the plight of disabled men and women today.

I am going to try to get him on SVR one of these days-

(we have a 5 second feed in case he says some bad words on the air-he is the type of kickass leadership we need running the VA in Washington DC.

[lu12]

My opinion: there are 1 good of 20 VSOs. The other 19 are of little help to the Vet, unfortunately. B)

1968 Nam Vet and Berta, good day.

Thank you for you opinion. See as for this topic this is another stressor that I can add to my

[A]nxiety & tress no doubt about it, if you go to a first interview with a (ser-rep), like an interview right - when it comes to discuss everything that is relate your health, this souls be consider like a private C&P exam, they should have like some form of protocol's 1. You are serv conn. for what? 2. After discharge or m/d - any other health problem that you think it may be related to active service or service connection disabilities. No need to way one or two years to ask these questions for then to say if you have this condition you know what, this can be related to service or it can be related to serv. conn. disabilities. Some medical conditions will develop with in the 12 mo. (pp) and others condition will take even more time than that it is been accepted by the VA.

So not only the veteran continue filling claims constantly every two years or so but so are the same thing with the (ser-rep-org). Look any increase for ser-conn. any possible and new medical condition that it has a good chance to be consider as secondary to ser-conn disabilities and even TDIU. In my case stop working since 1994 due to my ser-conn conditions it took my ser-rep four years to figure out that we could apply for TDIU. HOPE U UNDERSTAND WHERE I'M COMING FROM.

Constant stomach's constipation, hemorrhoids problem's since when any idea? see I could found out about these fact the last month or so I decided to change my POA and SRO. Ahhhh and b/c my ex-sro's ser-conn conditions that he claimed as secondary to his serv-conn conditions.

Do the system can even imposed on these SRO's some kind of limits, rules and quotas on how they can turned veteran's claim to the VA in oder to not to load the system.

Another thought on this matter my last SRO's facilities and manpower resource was limited and over loaded as it is today.

My last thought on this matter. I have Seen and reads some of our friends replay's related to veterans that continue to file claims from time to time and as I expressed my self above in some cases this is the fault of the SRO's now having said that I will said this again there are some ser-rep and then there are some ser-rep.

In my case I've my SSD benefits already since 1997 retroactive to 1994. I'm 41 years of age and b/c of my age factor the SSA required me to take a new medical evaluation every 3 or 4 years and b/c of this matter and the fact that my ser-conn disabilities have and continue to worsened with the years. Since I most comply, respond and cooperate with the SSA I'm responsible to provide and do the same for the VA in oder to prove of this fact. And b/c of my continuing deterioration of my s-c disabilities I will when ever is necessary to claim all of my rights and benefits that I'm entitle too.

Remember the VA-&-VHA systems where already overloaded, under pay and with a obsolete infrastructure well before the 1st gulf war. My unconditional and most humble respect to our fellow's service members coming from Iraq and Afghanistan and their dependents and families and because of then don't let no one to claim in your favor, your benefits one by one, think ahead preparedness make a full package create a protocol's and the when you are ready precede with you claim for entitlement for benefits. B)