Question On Relaxed Rules For Stressor Validation

[carlie]

If a claimant's unit has received the

Navy Presidential Unit Citation, will it be accepted

as along the lines of a CAB/CIB/CAR, as proof of the claimant

being a combat veteran, thereby relaxing the rules for

combat vet already having proof of stressor due to the unit's

Navy Presidential Unit Citation ?

Thanks for all replies.

carlie

[tagandbag]

I am going to say if you have documentation of where you were stationed and look at the daily reports, you will prevail. The va, looked at the daily reports and verified all the rocket attacks and other hostile actions in deciding what they deemed, as stressors, as to my claim. You, need the proof/facts..

Go for it...

t&b

[sixthscents]

Sure, any time you do the VA's job by providing evidence etc. you are helping your claim. I never filed a claim without evidence backing up my statements, and references to regulatory guidance upon the matter. The logs or daily reports are a great point. The problem is with vets getting them after they have been out for a few years etc. I have no idea how they are stored and maintained. Could you help with some idea as to this tagandbag? Is it easy for in-service guys to get them, can vets just ask the units for them etc. Any info is appreciated. This is a great point for newer vets which I never considered.

edit... upon consideration perhaps I was a bit harsh about the whole doing the VA's job... as a vet it just really behooves one to get the facts to the decison source themselves if possible and not rely upon the VA to do so.

Edited November 9, 2009 by sixthscents

[john999]

I have seen some of the after action and morning reports from Vietnam and I could not read them. Every military base in Vietnam was hit with rockets or mortars. If you hear the first one come in you are feeling fear. If a firefight erupts in the rubber plantation out in front of your bunker you are in fear. If a flare pops and you see movement your $#@hole puckers and your mouth goes dry. It is not the same as an infantry troop engaged in a firefight at close range, but there is fear. Some people react differently to this than others. I agree with others who say if you are diagnosed with PTSD and there are not other obvious stressors besides having been in a combat zone this should be presumptive for service related PTSD. There is an epidemic of PTSD and TBI and the VA is very late in dealing with this problem. 30% of current vets who have been to Iraq or Afghanistan are being dx'ed with mental health problems including PTSD. This is hundreds of thousands of vets. It may never happen, but I do think the day is not far off when PTSD will be presumptive for any vet who is diagnosed with it who has served in a combat zone. 2+2=4

[Philip Rogers]

Carlie, I disagree, in that, I read, the PTSD must be diagnosed while "actually" on active duty(AD). Since PTSD wasn't a diagnosis in the VN era, no one could be diagnosed w/it, while on AD. Therefore, VN vets will still need to have stressor verification. jmo

pr

John,

You and I have the same understanding of the new proposed rule.

If a MH doc states the vet has PTSD due to active duty, there will

no longer need to be a stressor verification.

I do believe this will apply to ALL veterans.

jmho,

carlie

[Berta]

The H VAC Roundtable meeting that developed this proposed new reg is here-

http://veterans.house.gov/hearings/hearing.aspx?NewsID=477

Witness testimony isn't available yet but I am sure the multimedia link at the H VAC site will bring the entire hearing to you in audio and color.

[sixthscents]

I have also heard troubling reports that the in service Active Duty psych's are stating a lot of soldiers have "adjustment disorder", and not PTSD. I've also heard depression, and anxiety disorder, really anything but PTSD if they can get around diagnosing it. I've heard it enough times, from people I trust that I am concerned.