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)

[Guest Jim S.]

Remember the original inquiry? I do, I wrote it. I might add to my post by asking why is it that we are held to such a higher standard of VA law than the VA itself is. Concider this, How much do you think the Government would have to pay for each person in service for an insurance policy that covers them for all the dangers that service is know for? I doubt that, even if the Government could afford it, their wouldn't be an insurance company that would underwrite such a policy. The Insurance Company would problably go belly up before the first year was even up.

So enough with the pissing and moaning, remember this old saying.

ARE'S IS NOT TO REASON WHY, BUT TO DO OR DIE.

So if I got a cancer that is concidered as a result of service, I think and believe that I have earned that concession as to cause.

Jim S. B)