Jump to content
VA Disability Community via Hadit.com

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

  • homepage-banner-2024-2.png

  • donate-be-a-hero.png

  • 0

P & T Question

Rate this question



I have a question regarding having a disability declared permanent. Does the veteran need to be unemployable? If the veteran has a schedular rating, does the disability to be rated permanent need to be 100%? My husband is rated 60% for the residuals of a pituitary operation where the gland was removed. This is a permanent condition, as are the residuals. Can we petition for that part of his ratings to be declared permanent, therefore not subject to reduction?

Also, can the veteran's age (56) be reasonable grounds to petition for his disabilities to be declared permanent? He is not rated for PTSD, so that's not a factor.

Is the request routed through the VARO?


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 7
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Recommended Posts

  • HadIt.com Elder

nothing in reality is permanent until a veteran has been rated for 20 years, the VA can always look to reduce or increase a rating (increase is always asked for by the veteran) it is my understanding until you have been SC for 20 years even a P&T rating can be reduced, it is hard to do, but it can be done, you gainnothing by having him declared P&T it does not give you the chapter 35 benefitts or CHAMPUS as you need the 100% rating for those benefits. I might be wrong but at 60% the veterans family is not entitled to Chapter 35 nor CHAMPVA or an ID card for PX and commissary use. That requires a 100% disability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that is the case, then glad I have been rated for 21 years for PTSD, but unfortunatly don't have the 100% at 20, only 7 1/2 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, we were wondering if we had anything to gain by pursuing P & T. My husband retired on a medical over 20 years enlisted, so we already have the benefits you mention. It's just that the pituitary gland does not regenerate, so the obvious question was whether we could pursue some "protection" for that portion of his rating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jim S.

I was only able to find this concering residuals fo pituatary surgery. Even though it requires continuous taking of hormone replacements, it appears that their isn't much in the way of rating for pituatary gland removal, except for the residual that may be as a result of the removal and or hormone replacement.

I woulld be doing what I can do to SC any residuals that may be noted pretaining to those areas listed below.

Note: Following surgery or treatment, evaluate as digestive,

skeletal, renal, or cardiovascular residuals or as endocrine


Good Luck.

Jim S. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Did your husband get rated for DI (diabetes insipidus)? I am with Jim for endoctrine issues. I still have my pituitary but it has lost most of its function so I was rated for the problems it causes not the pituitary itself.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, he doesn't have diabetes. Part of our deal with the VA is to gain satisfactory ratings for residuals that we want rated separately that have been lumped into the primary rating. One of the residuals we're trying to get rated is that part of the tumor was inoperable, and there is some tissue that remains. Because of this, my husband needs semi-annual MRI's to check to see if the tumor is regenerating. The impact on his eyesight has been rated separately, but we feel inadequately. Other than that, the remaining tissue doesn't cause him headaches, nor does it have any other manifestations. But we want its existence rated, even if only at 0%.

We have proof in his SMR's that the residual tumor was there at the time of surgery, throughout his checkups since then, and to this day. We also found mention of it in his VA MR's. Yet, the VA first tried to deny its existence, and then later stated that they acknowledged its existence, but already included it in his initial rating for pituitary problems. Our argument is that they couldn't have included it because they denied it was ever there in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use