Jump to content

Ask Your VA Claims Questions | Read Current Posts 
Read VA Disability Claims Articles
Search | View All Forums | Donate | Blogs | New Users | Rules 

  • tbirds-va-claims-struggle (1).png

  • 01-2024-stay-online-donate-banner.png

     

  • 0

Secretive Va Launches New Ptsd Review

Rate this question


Guest allanopie

Question

Guest allanopie

fwd from: unifiedveteranscoalition

SECRETIVE VA LAUNCHES NEW PTSD REVIEW

Just six days after canceling one PTSD review, the VA "sneaks in" another – Culture of secrecy makes agency designed to help veterans their biggest foe

by Larry Scott

http://www.opednews.com

Over the past year, the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (VA), led by Secretary Jim Nicholson, has turned a deaf ear to veterans and quietly made numerous decisions designed to strip veterans of benefits and compensation.

Secretary Nicholson came to the VA with no understanding of veterans’ advocacy and no experience in the healthcare sector. He had been Chairman of the Republican National Committee and Ambassador to the Vatican. As one pundit put it, "Jim Nicholson can write a good political bumper sticker and knows how to kiss the Pope’s ring. That’s about it."

But, with Secretary Nicholson at the VA helm, veterans have come to feel isolated from the agency’s decision-making processes. And, recent developments have done nothing quell that uneasy feeling.

Earlier this year, veterans were surprised by the VA’s "second signature required" (SSR) policy. SSR applied to approved claims for many "high-dollar" disabilities and stipulated that the claim be re-approved by another VA staffer. However, if the claim was denied by the first staffer, there was no second review.

Veterans’ groups claimed that a SSR policy should apply to all claims for any condition whether they were approved or denied. The fact that the VA chose to apply SSR to disabilities with "high-dollar" compensation was proof to many veterans that the agency was just trying to save money by denying benefits.

The SSR policy was NOT announced by the VA. Only some very good investigative work by Cheryl Reed of the Chicago Sun-Times brought the story to light. This is just one of many instances where the VA has instituted policies detrimental to veterans without making the actions public.

The latest "unannounced" move by the VA is a new review of PTSD diagnosis, treatment and compensation. The VA’s plans came to light on November 16, just six days after they had canceled a review of 72,000 PTSD claims awarded at 100 per cent disability. Pressure from veterans’ groups and Democrat members of Congress forced the cancellation.

The VA’s new PTSD review was not announced by the VA. There was no VA press release. There was no VA press conference. The information was not posted on the VA web site.

Information about the new PTSD review was made public in a press release by Senator Larry Craig (R-ID), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. The release, in part, said, "The Department of Veterans Affairs announced today that it has contracted with the Institute of Medicine (IOM) on a two-pronged approach to the examination of PTSD."

Except, the VA hadn’t announced anything. They were using Senator Craig as their conduit to hand out the bad news. Since Craig’s press releases don’t have a high readership, this information has gone virtually unnoticed.

Upon reading Senator Craig’s press release I called the Public Affairs Office at the VA. They had no knowledge of the review. I then called the Institute of Medicine. They had no knowledge of the review.

Senator Craig’s office was more helpful. They forwarded the two documents the VA had sent to them. One document is a Fact Sheet detailing the contract between the VA and the IOM. The other is a Question and Answer sheet. (NOTE: The VA documents are available at the following URL – http://www.vawatchdog.org/newsflash/newsfl...1-23-2005-3.htm )

I encourage all veterans to read the VA documents. They detail a plan to redefine PTSD by altering diagnostic and treatment techniques that will then lead to a complete restructuring of VA compensation. Following are a few excerpts from the VA Fact Sheet.

The IOM "…will review the utility and objectiveness of the criteria in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM- IV), and will comment on the validity of current screening instruments and their predictive capacity for accurate diagnoses."

This will allow the VA to write an alternate definition of PTSD exclusive of the DSM-IV and institute new methods of treatment outside of normally accepted guidelines. I wonder what the American Psychiatric Association will say about this?

Also, the IOM "…will review the literature on compensation practices for PTSD…and how changes in the frequency and intensity of symptoms affect compensation practices for PTSD; assessing how compensation practices and reevaluation requirements for PTSD compare with other chronic conditions which have periods of remission and return of symptoms; and reviewing strategies used to support recovery and return to function in patients with PTSD."

And, this will allow the VA to lower PTSD compensation based on "frequency and intensity of symptoms" and "remission and return of symptoms." The VA will also be looking to deny PTSD benefits based on the concept of "recovery and return to function." VA Secretary Nicholson has often used the word "recover" (terribly close to the word "cure") when speaking of veterans with PTSD. The IOM reviews will be completed in a year.

Also, there were two big surprises found in the Question and Answer document. "QUESTION: Why is this study being conducted now? ANSWER: Over the next two years, the [VA] Secretary and the Veterans’ Disability Benefits Commission (VDBC) is (sic) closely examining compensation for all health conditions, including PTSD."

Surprise number one is that the VA has not announced that Secretary Nicholson is examining compensation "for ALL health conditions." Veterans can only look forward to fewer benefits and lower compensation with Nicholson directing this endeavor.

The second surprise is Secretary Nicholson’s mention of the VDBC. The VDBC, by law, is "independent of the Department of Veterans’ Affairs." However, to discover that they are coordinating their efforts should not be a surprise. The VDBC is made up of 13 members who are currently studying all areas of VA compensation. Nine VDBC members were appointed by Republicans. Secretary Nicholson was appointed by President Bush.

Then there is the matter of timing. The VDBC’s charter stipulates that their reports must be done by October of 2006. But, the VDBC has also contracted with the IOM for studies that will not be complete for at least a year. They will be asking for an extension. This means that the VDBC reports from IOM and the VA reports from IOM will be released at the same time, well AFTER the 2006 elections. I don’t believe in coincidence.

Sometime in early 2007, after the elections, VA Secretary Jim Nicholson will be armed with reports from the VDBC and the VA’s IOM studies. Expect a two-fisted attack on veterans’ benefits and compensation from an administration that is the first to shout "Support Our Troops"…until they become veterans.

http://www.vawatchdog.org

Larry Scott (larry@vawatchdog.org)served four years in the U.S. Army with overseas tours as a Broadcast Journalist in Korea and the Azores and a stateside tour as a Broadcast Journalism Instructor at the Defense Information School (DINFOS). He was awarded DOD's First Place Thomas Jefferson Award for Excellence in Journalism. After the Army, Larry was a news anchor on WNBC Radio in New York City. He receives VA compensation for a service-connected disability. Larry is a regular on the Thom Hartmann show on KPOJ radio in Portland, Oregon. Today, Larry resides in Southwest Washington and operates the website VA Watchdog dot Org.

View it at http://xsorbit27.com/users5/unifiedveteran...ic=2711.new#new

Regards,

The unifiedveteranscoalition Team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 14
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Top Posters For This Question

Recommended Posts

fwd from: unifiedveteranscoalition

SECRETIVE VA LAUNCHES NEW PTSD REVIEW

Just six days after canceling one PTSD review, the VA "sneaks in" another – Culture of secrecy makes agency designed to help veterans their biggest foe

by Larry Scott

http://www.opednews.com

Over the past year, the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (VA), led by Secretary Jim Nicholson, has turned a deaf ear to veterans and quietly made numerous decisions designed to strip veterans of benefits and compensation.

Secretary Nicholson came to the VA with no understanding of veterans’ advocacy and no experience in the healthcare sector. He had been Chairman of the Republican National Committee and Ambassador to the Vatican. As one pundit put it, "Jim Nicholson can write a good political bumper sticker and knows how to kiss the Pope’s ring. That’s about it."

But, with Secretary Nicholson at the VA helm, veterans have come to feel isolated from the agency’s decision-making processes. And, recent developments have done nothing quell that uneasy feeling.

Earlier this year, veterans were surprised by the VA’s "second signature required" (SSR) policy. SSR applied to approved claims for many "high-dollar" disabilities and stipulated that the claim be re-approved by another VA staffer. However, if the claim was denied by the first staffer, there was no second review.

Veterans’ groups claimed that a SSR policy should apply to all claims for any condition whether they were approved or denied. The fact that the VA chose to apply SSR to disabilities with "high-dollar" compensation was proof to many veterans that the agency was just trying to save money by denying benefits.

The SSR policy was NOT announced by the VA. Only some very good investigative work by Cheryl Reed of the Chicago Sun-Times brought the story to light. This is just one of many instances where the VA has instituted policies detrimental to veterans without making the actions public.

The latest "unannounced" move by the VA is a new review of PTSD diagnosis, treatment and compensation. The VA’s plans came to light on November 16, just six days after they had canceled a review of 72,000 PTSD claims awarded at 100 per cent disability. Pressure from veterans’ groups and Democrat members of Congress forced the cancellation.

The VA’s new PTSD review was not announced by the VA. There was no VA press release. There was no VA press conference. The information was not posted on the VA web site.

Information about the new PTSD review was made public in a press release by Senator Larry Craig (R-ID), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. The release, in part, said, "The Department of Veterans Affairs announced today that it has contracted with the Institute of Medicine (IOM) on a two-pronged approach to the examination of PTSD."

Except, the VA hadn’t announced anything. They were using Senator Craig as their conduit to hand out the bad news. Since Craig’s press releases don’t have a high readership, this information has gone virtually unnoticed.

Upon reading Senator Craig’s press release I called the Public Affairs Office at the VA. They had no knowledge of the review. I then called the Institute of Medicine. They had no knowledge of the review.

Senator Craig’s office was more helpful. They forwarded the two documents the VA had sent to them. One document is a Fact Sheet detailing the contract between the VA and the IOM. The other is a Question and Answer sheet. (NOTE: The VA documents are available at the following URL – http://www.vawatchdog.org/newsflash/newsfl...1-23-2005-3.htm )

I encourage all veterans to read the VA documents. They detail a plan to redefine PTSD by altering diagnostic and treatment techniques that will then lead to a complete restructuring of VA compensation. Following are a few excerpts from the VA Fact Sheet.

The IOM "…will review the utility and objectiveness of the criteria in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM- IV), and will comment on the validity of current screening instruments and their predictive capacity for accurate diagnoses."

This will allow the VA to write an alternate definition of PTSD exclusive of the DSM-IV and institute new methods of treatment outside of normally accepted guidelines. I wonder what the American Psychiatric Association will say about this?

Also, the IOM "…will review the literature on compensation practices for PTSD…and how changes in the frequency and intensity of symptoms affect compensation practices for PTSD; assessing how compensation practices and reevaluation requirements for PTSD compare with other chronic conditions which have periods of remission and return of symptoms; and reviewing strategies used to support recovery and return to function in patients with PTSD."

And, this will allow the VA to lower PTSD compensation based on "frequency and intensity of symptoms" and "remission and return of symptoms." The VA will also be looking to deny PTSD benefits based on the concept of "recovery and return to function." VA Secretary Nicholson has often used the word "recover" (terribly close to the word "cure") when speaking of veterans with PTSD. The IOM reviews will be completed in a year.

Also, there were two big surprises found in the Question and Answer document. "QUESTION: Why is this study being conducted now? ANSWER: Over the next two years, the [VA] Secretary and the Veterans’ Disability Benefits Commission (VDBC) is (sic) closely examining compensation for all health conditions, including PTSD."

Surprise number one is that the VA has not announced that Secretary Nicholson is examining compensation "for ALL health conditions." Veterans can only look forward to fewer benefits and lower compensation with Nicholson directing this endeavor.

The second surprise is Secretary Nicholson’s mention of the VDBC. The VDBC, by law, is "independent of the Department of Veterans’ Affairs." However, to discover that they are coordinating their efforts should not be a surprise. The VDBC is made up of 13 members who are currently studying all areas of VA compensation. Nine VDBC members were appointed by Republicans. Secretary Nicholson was appointed by President Bush.

Then there is the matter of timing. The VDBC’s charter stipulates that their reports must be done by October of 2006. But, the VDBC has also contracted with the IOM for studies that will not be complete for at least a year. They will be asking for an extension. This means that the VDBC reports from IOM and the VA reports from IOM will be released at the same time, well AFTER the 2006 elections. I don’t believe in coincidence.

Sometime in early 2007, after the elections, VA Secretary Jim Nicholson will be armed with reports from the VDBC and the VA’s IOM studies. Expect a two-fisted attack on veterans’ benefits and compensation from an administration that is the first to shout "Support Our Troops"…until they become veterans.

http://www.vawatchdog.org

Larry Scott (larry@vawatchdog.org)served four years in the U.S. Army with overseas tours as a Broadcast Journalist in Korea and the Azores and a stateside tour as a Broadcast Journalism Instructor at the Defense Information School (DINFOS). He was awarded DOD's First Place Thomas Jefferson Award for Excellence in Journalism. After the Army, Larry was a news anchor on WNBC Radio in New York City. He receives VA compensation for a service-connected disability. Larry is a regular on the Thom Hartmann show on KPOJ radio in Portland, Oregon. Today, Larry resides in Southwest Washington and operates the website VA Watchdog dot Org.

View it at http://xsorbit27.com/users5/unifiedveteran...ic=2711.new#new

Regards,

The unifiedveteranscoalition Team.

Greetings,

I am 100% T&P but not for PTSD. I do have depression, however but could not compare to you fellow brothers whom have seen and done things I have only read about. I recieved a copy of my last American L. Magizine. There was a story in there about a fellow veteran brother who killed him self because of this issue. I read that story to the Church I minister , and at the end there was no dry eye including mine. It is a tragic that our goverment that ecah of us was willing to die for could create such an evil issue to impose on the men with PTSD. I heard that the congress repealed it like they were doing the Veterans a big favor. The issue is here is how did it ever get that far to start with?

As a Christian I voted for Bush the first time around. I believed him when he said he would take care of the Veterans, but it seems to me that all I have seen him do is take, take and take. He would have had the power to put this issue to bed before it even started, however he did not, and he knew it was going to happen. The blood of all the men that killed themselves is on his and the VA seceatary heads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was admonished over posting the links that started this topic because Larry Scott @ the VA Watchdog site is offering opinion not fact. Crying Wolf over PTSD Reviews does nothing but cause grief to those with PTSD. Can we please try and post facts so that those concerned don't panic thinking this is another attempt to review individual claims. This new agreement between VA and IOM is to take a look at the "process" not claims. Here is a link to the VA's Press Release concerning this matter:

http://www.senate.gov/~veterans/index.cfm?...Releases&id=339

There were many who said we were needlessly worrying about the "72,000 PTSD reiviews", but, as another poster here just pointed out, how many vets died because of that review? The very nature of PTSD is to be paranoid and over-react...the VA knows this yet they push these vets time and time again KNOWING they could hurt themselves or others. Regardless of the VA's intentions or what you want to read into it, ANY review of PTSD cases is going to cause good veterans to die....what I really want to know, is how is this different then murder? If the VA KNOWS (from historical data) that veterans seem to take their lives when pressured by the VA (be it justified or not), then how is that not premeditated murder?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Tell a friend

    Love HadIt.com’s VA Disability Community Vets helping Vets since 1997? Tell a friend!
  • Recent Achievements

    • Lebro earned a badge
      First Post
    • stuart55 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • stuart55 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Lebro earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Sparklinger earned a badge
      First Post
  • Our picks

    • Caluza Triangle defines what is necessary for service connection
      Caluza Triangle – Caluza vs Brown defined what is necessary for service connection. See COVA– CALUZA V. BROWN–TOTAL RECALL

      This has to be MEDICALLY Documented in your records:

      Current Diagnosis.   (No diagnosis, no Service Connection.)

      In-Service Event or Aggravation.
      Nexus (link- cause and effect- connection) or Doctor’s Statement close to: “The Veteran’s (current diagnosis) is at least as likely due to x Event in military service”
      • 0 replies
    • Do the sct codes help or hurt my disability rating 
    • VA has gotten away with (mis) interpreting their  ambigious, , vague regulations, then enforcing them willy nilly never in Veterans favor.  

      They justify all this to congress by calling themselves a "pro claimant Veteran friendly organization" who grants the benefit of the doubt to Veterans.  

      This is not true, 

      Proof:  

          About 80-90 percent of Veterans are initially denied by VA, pushing us into a massive backlog of appeals, or worse, sending impoverished Veterans "to the homeless streets" because  when they cant work, they can not keep their home.  I was one of those Veterans who they denied for a bogus reason:  "Its been too long since military service".  This is bogus because its not one of the criteria for service connection, but simply made up by VA.  And, I was a homeless Vet, albeit a short time,  mostly due to the kindness of strangers and friends. 

          Hadit would not be necessary if, indeed, VA gave Veterans the benefit of the doubt, and processed our claims efficiently and paid us promptly.  The VA is broken. 

          A huge percentage (nearly 100 percent) of Veterans who do get 100 percent, do so only after lengthy appeals.  I have answered questions for thousands of Veterans, and can only name ONE person who got their benefits correct on the first Regional Office decision.  All of the rest of us pretty much had lengthy frustrating appeals, mostly having to appeal multiple multiple times like I did. 

          I wish I know how VA gets away with lying to congress about how "VA is a claimant friendly system, where the Veteran is given the benefit of the doubt".   Then how come so many Veterans are homeless, and how come 22 Veterans take their life each day?  Va likes to blame the Veterans, not their system.   
    • Welcome to hadit!  

          There are certain rules about community care reimbursement, and I have no idea if you met them or not.  Try reading this:

      https://www.va.gov/resources/getting-emergency-care-at-non-va-facilities/

         However, (and I have no idea of knowing whether or not you would likely succeed) Im unsure of why you seem to be so adamant against getting an increase in disability compensation.  

         When I buy stuff, say at Kroger, or pay bills, I have never had anyone say, "Wait!  Is this money from disability compensation, or did you earn it working at a regular job?"  Not once.  Thus, if you did get an increase, likely you would have no trouble paying this with the increase compensation.  

          However, there are many false rumors out there that suggest if you apply for an increase, the VA will reduce your benefits instead.  

      That rumor is false but I do hear people tell Veterans that a lot.  There are strict rules VA has to reduce you and, NOT ONE of those rules have anything to do with applying for an increase.  

      Yes, the VA can reduce your benefits, but generally only when your condition has "actually improved" under ordinary conditions of life.  

          Unless you contacted the VA within 72 hours of your medical treatment, you may not be eligible for reimbursement, or at least that is how I read the link, I posted above. Here are SOME of the rules the VA must comply with in order to reduce your compensation benefits:

      https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/3.344

       
    • Good question.   

          Maybe I can clear it up.  

          The spouse is eligible for DIC if you die of a SC condition OR any condition if you are P and T for 10 years or more.  (my paraphrase).  

      More here:

      Source:

      https://www.va.gov/disability/dependency-indemnity-compensation/

      NOTE:   TO PROVE CAUSE OF DEATH WILL LIKELY REQUIRE AN AUTOPSY.  This means if you die of a SC condtion, your spouse would need to do an autopsy to prove cause of death to be from a SC condtiond.    If you were P and T for 10 full years, then the cause of death may not matter so much. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use