Deleted

[RSG]

Deleted

Edited March 1, 2008 by RSG

[john999]

RSG

Maybe you should hire a lawyer. If you filed one month after discharge and were denied you might have a CUE if the decision was final. 1969 has been a long time ago. When you go to file a claim now after almost 40 years with no treatment for depression in the years since discharge I don't see how you can do it unless you can show that you should have gotten it to begin with back in 1969. People with PTSD are able to get SC'ed 40 years later without treatment records because of the nature of PTSD. You better have some combat awards and a current diagnosis of PTSD. The longer away from the event and service you get the harder it is to win a claim.

[RSG]

Hey john,

I did, Shows right in my records,they did deny. I have had treatment since 1997 for depression, Both civilian, and, MHC/VAH vet centersince 2002. tried before by going to DAV first I went 3 more times to DAV and filed the same claim. I was told I had no rights to benefits by Navy. So I thouhgt I would have to go thru the DAVfirst. It was denied evrytime. Says right in my discharge papers,It say's "precipitating stress: routine military service". Remember that it is not claimed as PTSD. Just depression.

Thanks for the info though. I am seriously considering and attempting to find an attorney. I need to be able to talk to him

first. Not get orders right off the bat. They need to know the facts. I admit it may be tough.What is a CUE?

RSG

RSG

Maybe you should hire a lawyer. If you filed one month after discharge and were denied you might have a CUE if the decision was final. 1969 has been a long time ago. When you go to file a claim now after almost 40 years with no treatment for depression in the years since discharge I don't see how you can do it unless you can show that you should have gotten it to begin with back in 1969. People with PTSD are able to get SC'ed 40 years later without treatment records because of the nature of PTSD. You better have some combat awards and a current diagnosis of PTSD. The longer away from the event and service you get the harder it is to win a claim.

Edited March 1, 2008 by RSG

[rentalguy1]

CUE = Clear and Unmistakable Error. Hard to get them to admit, even harder to prove.

[Ron II]

A nexus for a physical malady is easy to provide. Example:

A vet has people hold him down and jump on his back, which causes a spine injury. The vet goes to the TMC for treatment. The vet continues to have back trouble and files a VA claim after ETS.

1. Current condition: Back pain

2. In service event: guys hold him down and jump on his back

3. Nexus: the medical paper trail from the vet's treatment.

Another example:

A OIF vet served in Mosul in 2006. During a convoy, his HUMVEE was hit by an IED. The vet recieved minor wounds, for which he received the Purple Heart. During this event, his buddy, whom the vet had served with for the last three years was KIA. The vet develops PTSD from the event.

1. Current condition: PTSD

2. In service event: his HUMVEE was hit by an IED

3. Nexus: the Purple Heart Citation, medical treatment records from wounds received, buddy letters from others that witnessed the IED explosion, and the after-action report of the incident.

Moreover, VA tells each vet what must be shown for the award of each claim both in the VCAA letter that precedes the rating activity, and in the SOC which follows the rating activity. If you want me to look at your SOC you can email it to me. If I can help you determine what went wrong and where you need to go from here, I will.

Hello rentalguy,

Nice post; good examples that are easy to understand.

Thanks,

Ron

[RSG]

Thank you very much, that is most helpful.

RSG

Bear in mind I am only trying to help. I just had a meeting with my VSO and he gave me a sheet that has a pretty good (I guess) definiton of nexus:

Medical Nexus Opinion Letter\\

Cite service medical records,any rating decisions from the VA and/or statements from individuals.

AND

The VA may consider your issue if you send in scientific or medical evidence showing that your claimed condition is medically associated with service.

If your doctor has expressed an opinion regarding the relationship of your claimed condition, send the VA that opinion, the reasons and basis for that opinion, and the clinical treatment records.

In addition, the doctor should provide literature that supports the opinion. literature my consist of scientific or medical journal articles,etc,that support the doctors opinion of your currently diagnosed condition.

The doctor should use the following wording "at least as likely as not" but VA will usually also accept "probable", "likely", more than 50% certain, etc.; in other words, phrases that throw the balance more in favor of the claimant.

IN THE CASE OF A SECONDARY CONDTION:

A secondary condition is a direct result of the primary condition. This is important because mant doctors like to include terms such as "contributed to", "may have", or "possibly influenced" or similar phrases in their nexus statements: these thypes of statements are not sufficient to satisfy the "proximately due to" part of the regulation "is possible", "could have", "may have", etc. As with any nexus statement, the best wording is " at least as likely as not" but VA will usually also accept "probable", "likely", "more than 50% certain", etc; in other words , phrases that throw the balance in favor of the claimant.

I hope the above helps someone and Good luck with your claims.

Stillhere

[free_spirit_etc]

Granted - the nexus is important - and I know the VA often tries to discount a doctor's opinion if the doctor relied solely on the vet's report for the in-service ocurrance.

And yes, it would be stronger if the SMRs show treatment. But this Federal Court case also pretty well indicates that the VA can't discount lay evidence merely because it isn't supported by the service medical records - and that they can't discount doctor's opinions merely because the doctor relied on the vet's lay testimony.

http://www.hadit.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=12125

http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/05-7174.pdf

You DO want to build as strong of case as you can. But I also think this court ruling can be used for appeals in which a doctor who is not favorable to your claim uses as his ONLY (or main reason) that the LACK of evidence in your SMR's means something did NOT occur.

For instance, in my husband's case where the reason the VA doctor said my husband's cancer couldn't be connected to asbestos exposure was because there is no evidence my husband was in any occupational screening programs. Well duh... they didn't START them until the mid 80's (my husband was an Air Force electrician from 1970 - 1983)

So in this case - the doctor's reasoning that my husband's cancer was not related to asbestos exposure was that - because he was not in a screening program - he was not exposed.

I think this court case can be very helpful for vets when:

1. The VA says something could NOT have occured because it isn't documented in the medical records.

2. The VA says a doctor's report holds no value because it relies on lay testimony which isn't documented.

I think the court was pretty clear on the fact that the VA CAN discredit lay testimony, but NOT merely because it is not backed with medical documentation.

For instance, in my husband's case - what is more credible:

1. The fact that he worked as an air force electrician (documented). That once the asbestos programs were started (AFTER my husband crossed trained in another field) the electricians WERE a part of occupational screening (thus my husband WOULD have been - had he STILL been an electrician - --which would also indicate that he spent 13 years working in an environment that was later considered a risk for exposure).

OR

2. The VA's reliance that he was NOT exposed to asbestos merely because the doctor stated he wasn't part of a screening program (that was not even in existance at that time).