Question On Rule Of Law If Any,

[Guest Jim S.]

It has always been a question in my mind, as to how the VA can rule an injury, that is clearly documented as having occured while in the service and having been the reason for the Veterans discharge, at the recommendation of a P.E. Board and/or Medical board, being released from service as unfit for further duty or medicaly discharged for same, whether it be rated as 0% or 100% disableing at time of discharge, should not have been found service connected.

Why then may the VA find the condition as not service connected, without first showing that the disease and/or injury having already been diagnosed and for which veteran was discharged for, was clearly and erroniously in error, before finding that the condition was not deserving of service connection?

Even injuries and diseases that are found to have occured prior to service are protected, if shown to have increased in severity because of and during service. Even a congenital disorder or defect may be found service connected if it's severity is as a result of a service connected disability and can be rule as one disorder.

All I am saying is, if a Veteran is discharge for medical or physical reasons that is listed as a disability within the laws that govern the VA, Why then must the VA say othewise without first finding that the diagnosis was CUE first. Why with out finding CUE in the diagnosis then, that all is left is for them to rate the disability as to its rate of severity for pension and/or compensation.

We all know from personal experience that diseases and injuries we recieved in service, may have been slight at the time but do to facters not contimplated at the time the disease and or injury for which we were discharged for may increase ti have a disabling efftect on our lives.

Should these diseases and injuries be rated as service connected, if only at 0% so that years down the road should these same injuries prove to cause increasing disabilities in our lives, could then be look at for increase, instead of have to prove a claim that should have been service connected, in the first place.

Sorry Guys and Gals, I'm in a misserable funk and I have a nasty Flu like bug I am fighting that makes for to much time for my mind to dwell on things I cannot change or understand.

Jim S. B)

[Jay Johnson]

Well, just because a disease occured while in the military and the military medically retired the individual, does not mean that the disability is service connected. For example, one could come down with cancer while in the military and said cancer could lead to a medical discharge, but that doesn't mean the military "caused" the cancer in the first place. It's not enough to just get injured in the military, one needs to prove that the military had some influence on said injury.

If you're refering to a disability that the military acknowledged as being service connected before being medically discharged (IE - the military said it was their fault) then the VA should not even question the validity of that person's SC. Of crouse, we're dealing with a VA that could care less about veterans and looks at them as money-grubbing cry-babies.

Issues like these that defy common sense and are direct/obvious attempts to keep veterans from deserved compensation need to be addressed on a national level. The SOs, senators and public in general have failed veterans in this regard.

[john999]

Jim S

I don't understand how you got a medical discharge but were denied SC. I know they sneaked in that personality disorder thing. That was a dirty deal.

[Testvet]

they did it a lot in the late 60's and early 70's diagnose you with a pre-existing condition from your childhood and then deny benefits, the OIF/OEF veterans need to be careful when being interviewed as anything said will be pounced on as ah'ha see it is from a pre-service origin, we are not responsible. They will spend the next 20-30 years fighting it and if they get real lucky will get it overturned maybe. It;s disgraceful.

[john999]

Testvet

That is what they did to me but they tacked on 10% for a nervous condition and that saved me in the end.

[Guest Jim S.]

John999: That's why I said it bothers me to this day. I looked at my P.E Board Proceedings and Findings and this is what I found.

1. The disability was incurred while intitled to receive basic pay

2. The disability is not due to intentional misconduct or willful neglect

3. The disability was not incurred during a period of unauthorized absence.

4. The disability is the proximate result of active duty or inactive training

5. The disability may be permanent.

6. The disability is ratable as set forth above at 0 percent.

The reason for the 0% was that the condition was considered in remission at the time, and that I would be filing a claim with the VA for benefits which I was told paid more. If I had known I would have had to fight for my benefits, I would have never signed anything, They would have had to carry me out.

I was young and ignorant and wanted to get out of the hospital lock up ward.

Jim S. B)

[Guest Jim S.]

If I knew that I was at least service connected at 0% at the time by the VA, I probably wouldn't have thought anything about going in to see a Dr for any problems after service, I didn't even know I could go the the VAMC for treatment until I was told to go thier by an unemployment councelor from the VA and then one thing led to another and I found this site.

I've been working my claim ever since and was able to get a NSC pension that carried thru until I was able to qualify for Social Security Disability Insurance. Now that will carry me thru while I carry my fight to the VA for SC my mental problems and all.

Jim S. B)