Help!? Got An Imo But It Needs Tweaking

[Jayg]

Howdy all. I found a doctor that gave me a 'more likely than not' on connecting my arthritis to my sc conditions (flat feet and ankle injury). I gave the good Dr. a copy of Strickland's sample letter and he tried to follow it but he didn't get it right in detail. I had fore warned him that VA was fussy as all get out and he told me to let him know if it needed altered so there's no problem on that end.

He gave me three lightly filled pages with information scattered about and omitted a lot of detail, providing mainly broad statements/impressions. Too, I hadn't brought the full battery of my records since at this first visit, I hadn't actually expected the letter. His office people really had no idea what I was asking of him so I just expected to explain what I wanted and to see if he would do it. He accepted the idea, looked at what I had brought and gave me an exam. then produced the 'letter.' It lacks comment about 'reviewing SMR's' and I hadn't brought my x-rays/MRI so he lleft that blank. I'll carry all that stuff when I go back to him.

What I'm wanting to do is spoon feed him the finished product as near as I can so he pretty much just has to fill in the blanks, as it were, and sign it.

That's where you good folk come in. ;)

Please bear with me as this is long but I really need input here.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This is his, I guess call it opinion or cover letter with my edits for him in Italics. The next two are his additional pages. Some information useful, some needs amended and some omitted as potentially harmful or just needless. In the end, it all needs shuffled into a whole... This is what I'm hoping you all can help me with. Something fit to set VA back on it's heels. And this is in time for my Hearing in March.

>>> One more thing. This fellow above is a foot/ankle doctor. Good for that and connecting secondary conditions. I have also come upon a 'doctor of Internal medicine' I know willing to help me out too. Is it a good thing to have two IMO from different perspectives???

[SFCTRUCKDRIVER]

hey check out my posts, alot of the other great members posted the info on them ref IMo you need.

[Berta]

"Is it a good thing to have two IMO from different perspectives???"

sure if it helps your claim-

When I filed my AO death claim I tried to find a former VA Neuro doctor who had treated my husband.The VA could find no record of him ever working for them but this was my fault-I had misspelled his name-it was very hard to read his signature in the med recs.He was same doc who prepared an MRI but I thought they were 2 different docs at first.

It took 6 months to find him as he had gone into private practice.

Finally he contacted me via email and asked me for better copies of the med recs I had sent to him.

The VA had cut off the most important part of one record when they copied it.

It then took me almost 6 more monhs to get a good copy of this sole chem report record.The local VA FOIA woman gave me some BS and made me prove again I was the surviving spouse of the veteran.(DUH-I get DIC so they should not have questioned that)

When the Neuro doc got the good copy he made an email statement to me-that was dynamite-

after I emailed Dr. Bash and he called me (as he emailed if I had what I said I had it looked good but I didnt have the VA docs statement at that time)

I mentioned this statement to Dr. BAsh who was thrilled with it, and called the doctor himself to get the statement on the actual doctor's letterhead and he incorporated this with his 2 IMOs.

It was really only one sentence- but dynamite.

I also explained to the VA -with the subsequent med recs-why this statement was probative to my claim.

A good strong IMO must fall into the criteria I have posted here-

but this second IMO- only one sentence- was probative to my claim.

It this second IMO from the former VA Neuro was all I had -I think VA would have rejected it-but additional IMos can enhance a claim.

[Berta]

PS-I diodnt really expain what I mean correctly-

an additional IMO should not be redundant nor cummulate to the first-

but obviously a second IMO doctor will prepare a different review of the evidence and word it in a different way.

When a vet submits a second IMO from a different doctor they should stress that the evidence they are enclosing cooraborates the opinion of the initial doctor,based on a distinct and separate review of all evidence available.

[Jayg]

PS-I diodnt really expain what I mean correctly-

an additional IMO should not be redundant nor cummulate to the first-

but obviously a second IMO doctor will prepare a different review of the evidence and word it in a different way.

When a vet submits a second IMO from a different doctor they should stress that the evidence they are enclosing cooraborates the opinion of the initial doctor,based on a distinct and separate review of all evidence available.

I follow you. Thanks, Berta. These two doctors are from different specialties.

Concerning that foot/ankle doctor's IMO I posted below... Any advice on tweaking it into a stronger letter? It's thin on the ground now.

[tssnave]

If he will, have the doc ad a brief cv (resume) at the bottom of the IMO. That's what I did w/ my psych IMO because my IMO shrink had 20 years experience to include contracting for the state and SS.

Good luck and keep us posted about your claim.

TS Snave

[Capt.]

Hello TS,,,, Actually you may help the doctor to write a proper Nexus. Though I do not have the VA 38 CFR or M21 but someone will post it. I think I did post it here a while back. The Veteran may write the nexus up and help the Doctor as long as all statements are true and the Doctor has reviewed the records you use. I have had to do as you have done and help the doctors to write the nexus to "satisfy" the VA criteria. I am not happy myself with one nexus I got and need the doctor to rewrite it ,,,,if he will. Some doctors just get offended that they know more than the VA and "staff" usually will not or refuse to do that because they "think" it is illegal. Berta is right on the corraboration on the doctors. Let the doctors all agee with each other making remarks on the other and their agreement to the causes and the link using "most likely as not' , as least as likely as not" wording. Hang in there ...God Bless , C.C. NEVER GIVE UP