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)

[wallyg]

I still don't understand what you mean? You need to establish a "nexus" to receive compensation and nexus, by definition, is a "link"...so, how then can one establish compensation without a link to the military? Accept for in extreme cases like AO and other chemical/biological agents, cancer is not th direct cause of military duty, so how can one establish a nexus for compensation for a disease the military, obviously, didn't cause? Obviously, I'm missing something:-)

The DD2a4 is your 'link' to the military.

If you think that it is 'obvious' that the military did not cause the cancer, then you know something that most oncologists do not.

Obviously, if the cancer shows up early (maybe first 2-3 years), in military service, than you would have a hard time claiming that it developed in service. But, if you have more time in, before it is discovered, or if you retire, and are then diagnosed within the year, then there is no need for a nexus.

Jay, you have to look at the wider picture when you are giving advice. Try to be sure that it fits all circumstances, or specify that it is specific only to the post you are answering. Circumstances vary widely and wildly, you can be specific to one case, when you have full information; but most of the time you don't have enough information to be that specific, so must give answers that are useful to all.

You let your youthful enthusiasm and desire to help run away with your advice, sometimes.

[Guest Jim S.]

To all:

Although I ultimately wish to service connect my mental problems, my first and formost concern is that that the VARO failed to properly adjudicate for the diagnosis made in service and failed to properly support a change in a diagnosis. Once this is corrected, then service connecting the in service diagnosis and other mental problems noted at the time can be found SC too.

I just want to prove them wrong and if I can benefit from that, it's just a bonus like a cherry on top.

Jim S. :)

[Jay Johnson]

The DD2a4 is your 'link' to the military.

If you think that it is 'obvious' that the military did not cause the cancer, then you know something that most oncologists do not.

Obviously, if the cancer shows up early (maybe first 2-3 years), in military service, than you would have a hard time claiming that it developed in service. But, if you have more time in, before it is discovered, or if you retire, and are then diagnosed within the year, then there is no need for a nexus.

Jay, you have to look at the wider picture when you are giving advice. Try to be sure that it fits all circumstances, or specify that it is specific only to the post you are answering. Circumstances vary widely and wildly, you can be specific to one case, when you have full information; but most of the time you don't have enough information to be that specific, so must give answers that are useful to all.

You let your youthful enthusiasm and desire to help run away with your advice, sometimes.

I'm a nurse by profession, so please don't talk down to me about cancer. Cancer is not CAUSED by the military and to insinuate otherwise is lunacy. There are cases where pathogens from military service can cause cancer, but 99% of cancers are unexplained, genetic problems...please do some research on the topic before you berate me again!

Again, I am NOT reading the regulation the way you are. I always took SC to mean that there must be some sort of nexus between service and the disability. Now, if you have some information that shows that one merely needs to get a disability while in the military, then so be it, but don't belittle yet another of my posts. This is the second time in several days that you have personally attacked one of my posts and the first of which was a gross misunderstanding on your part and NOT my mistake...if you feel the need to continue to berate my posts I will leave the vet help to you. I have better ways to spend my time then getting a face full of shit every time I try to help a veteran.

P.S. – For christ’s sake, I said from the beginning that If my interpretation was wrong then so be it, but show me why rather then call me a misguided child.

[Dr Paladin]

Jay:

Now you know why Walter is so upsetting to me.... His remark " You let your youthful enthusiasm and desire to help run away with your advice, sometimes"

was uncalled for...I'll take the word of a health care professional.... Stay the course, you post good advice.

[Guest Jim S.]

Jay Johnson: To put it semply, the government has established law that gives the presumption that a Veteran is medically and psychologicaly fit for service upon enlistment, and the presumption in most cases, that if the Veteran becomes Ill for either medical or psychological reasons, then it will be deemed to have occured as a result of military service. Mind you, their are exceptions to the rule and that is when a Nexus must be shown.

One thing to note, as science progesses, they are bound to find the exact cause of certain illness and if they can be shown as being caused from hereditary or developmental causes, be assured that the VA will try to have those illniess's listed as not subject to SC for benefit purposes.

Even if you should be 100% SC with P&T with all the other benefits that may apply to your claim. It is tantamount that you stay up to date on what is happening with VA benefits. We will always be a odds with the Government over what benefits a Veteran should be intitle to and the VA will always be trying ways in which to deny us those benefits we have worked, thus far, for them.

Keep up the fight, and try not to let anything someone might say or ensenuate get under your skin, Their are days I want to lash out and it isn't necessarily anyones fault, It has to do more with my problems and the medications I take or even how I feel when I get out of bed in the morning. Waiting to hear that their is movement in your claim process seems to depress me more and highten my anxiety more than anything else.

Keep on posting,

Jim S. :)

[wallyg]

I am trying to provide constructive criticism, and I certainly did not imply that your were childish. However, after this rant, I will classify you as immature.

Since you apparently have difficulty with my English, I will leave you alone to make your broad generalizations, and misinterpretations of VA regulations. Experience has shown that to give advice based upon limited experience with the VA, and based upon strict legal interpretation of VA regulations and Manuals, is a recipe for long tem frustration.

I took you to task several times, because we need people with direct medical expertise on the board, and I didn't like to see you giving advice that I thought overly optimistic, to say the least, rather than sticking to your area of medical expertise.

Even those of us who have many years of experience in dealing with the VA, still make mistakes, but we try to correct each other, when that happens. Nobody can know it all, for one thing the VA is busy dreaming up variations of their shell game all the time.

I think you need to be less sensitive, and not think that everybody who criticizes is another 'arkansas' or 'ptsdkid'.

Good luck Jay, I'll leave you in peace. By the way, did you read what Jim S. said. He put it in simpler language than I did.