Finally, Personality Disorder, Inadequate Type Rebutted?

[Rockhound]

As more than some of you know, I have been kicking around the idea that the personality disorder, inadequate type I was saddled with in 1974 by a C&P examiner and wrongfully used as a alternative diagnosis to a psychotic episode I had while in the service, by a VARO Ratings Officer.

Now, nearly 35 yrs later, I have finally been diagnosed with a post traumatic cognitive personality disorder or rather DSM IV (DC) 310.1 Personality Change Due to a General Medical Condition, as a result of the cerebral concussion with frontal lobe involvement.

This new News comes way to late for an EED I believe, since I can't use it to claim an error in 1974, but it does help me now to finally rebutt the prior diagnosis of the personality disorder, inadequate type.

My question is, the psychotic episode in 1974 was diagnosed as an Acute Schizophrenic Episode, in remission, demonstrating moderate impairment to social and industrial adaptability. It is apparent from the records that the residuals demonstrated were never considered in lue of the wrongful diagnosis of the personality disorder. Can this be the last prong of a CUE claim showing how I was monitarily deprived of VA benefits and compensation?

I'm as sure as I can be that I can show the other parts of CUE. This last part has had me in a quandry for some time now. Not that it helps my CUE claim any but the revisions over the years for the DSM has DSM IV (DC) 9205 as Schizophreia, Residual Type, Other and Unspecified Types as per 38 CFR 4.130 Schedule of Ratings-Mental Disorders.

Rockhound Rider

[LarryJ]

I'd durn sure file for the '74 EED.

just sayin'

[john999]

Rockhound

I was diagnosed with residual schizophrenia in 1973. I only got 10%, but it lead to TDIU years later. I filed a CUE based on the fact that VA had my private medical records that said I was unemployable due to residual schizophrenia and the VA ignored this report. The VA said I had a personality disorder but DSM (9205) as well. You got screwed. You should have been diagnosed with (9205).

[Josephine]

I was labeled with " emotional Instability" discharge. I later rid myself of the personality disorder as there

was no basis. My correct diagnosis was " Anxiety"

Betty

Edited May 5, 2009 by Josephine

[Rockhound]

I'm glad for all of you who have been labled by the VA with Personality Disorders and having them corrected, however: I believe I have been able to pass (1)(3)(4) prongs of CUE, it is number (2) in that the results would have been manifestly different but for the error. I feel at this point had they properly SC'd the Acute Schizophrenia episode and then taken into account the moderate impairment to social and industrial addaptability, then this would have manifestly changed the results. Noting how they made the error is the easy part.

I am looking for feed back, if the moderate impairment of social and industrial adaptability, enough to show how the claim would have been manifestly changed had it not been for the error?

(1)CUE is a very specific and rare kind of error. It is the

kind of error, of fact or law, that when called to the

attention of later reviewers compels the conclusion, to which

reasonable minds could not differ, (2)that the result would have

been manifestly different but for the error. (3)Generally,

either the correct facts, as they were known at the time,

were not before the Board, (4)or the statutory and regulatory

provisions extant at the time were incorrectly applied. 38

C.F.R. § 20.1403(a) (2008). See also Fugo v. Brown, 6 Vet.

App. 40, 43 (1993).

Rockhound Rider

[Hoppy]

ROCKHOUND

The symptoms as you feel they should have been applied to another chronic condition sounds to me like an error in the facts as described by the doctors.

Please cite the diagnosis of record at the time of the original decision that indisputably shows a chronic mental condition that could have been service connected. As I remember there was a notation that you would continue to have symptoms after service. I also remember that you thought it met the 10% criteria. That is were you need to focus.

Citation Nr: 0901931

This case has some similarities to yours. The adjudicators ignored that he was treated for depression. The SMR clearly showed that he was treated for depression. The problem is that the adjudicator did not associate the symptoms of depression with a chronic psychiatric condition. Note that to get around the issue of improper weight they required indisputable evidence of record at the time of the original decision.

The facts of your case at the time of the adjudication can be wrong and it is not always a CUE. If the facts were wrong because they did not obtain medical reports of record and they were supposed to obtain the records can be a CUE. However, I have not seen any cases whereby the facts are wrong because the doctors made an inaccurate diagnosis or whereby adjudication failed to seek clarification of a medical opinion(duty to assist)that were considered a CUE.

[Wings]

x

x

x

I belive the severence of serviceconnection was also CUE. ~Wings

ISSUE: Entitlement to restoration of service-connection for Schizophrenia, residual type; other and unspecified types, DSM IV (DC) 9205.

Once service connection has been granted, the award of service connection will be severed only where evidence establishes that the original grant of service connection was clearly and unmistakably erroneous, and only after certain procedural safeguards have been met (38 CFR 3.105(d)).