ptsd Just Got Back From Appt With Va Psych....grrrrr

[Gridsmasher11]

I just returned from an appointment with my VA psychiatrist....She just seems to want to keep increasing my meds but doesn't really want to help with my claim.....I asked her to specifically write me a nexus letter or to put into my treatment notes that my PTSD 'is more likely than not caused by my time in the Gulf"....She says that she has already stated that it is service connected and that she wants me to be service connected for this but will not write this as I have asked....Are they instructed to not write it plainly so we can support our claims????? She said it would be a conflict of interest.????I asked her how it would be a conflict of interest, wasn't she my treating Phsychiatrist (she said yes) but she just wants to him and haww........GRRRRRRRRR...VA causes us more stress and just wants to dope us up and hope we forget...............................................Did find out some things that may help my claim......The doctor that did my PTSD C&P back in March is only an MD.....According to VA regs it should have been a Psychiatrist or Phsycologist...So I have a point there....Still gathering the stuff to keep fighting my claim.............................GRID

[mobie16r]

Larry you are right the va psy have corroborate that the veteran Irag tour is the reason he suffer from ptsd

Edited August 8, 2010 by mobie16r (see edit history)

[Pete53]

I think that mobie has got it right. This is going to be a big help for Veterans who did not see combat but have PTSD.

[Former Member]

I agree and concur with Larry 150 % !!!!!!!!!!!!!! or more.

I raised the IMO issue in my comments at the Fed Reg site when this reg came out.I don't know if any other commenter asked these questions as well.

I was on the second page along with 173 other commenters:

Name: Berta M Simmons

Organization: volunteer vets advocate

General Comment

I am a volunteer veteran's disability advocate ,widow of 2 vets, mother of a vet and a VA claimant.

The proposed amendment to the PTSD determinations does recognize the inherent nature of warfare, as well as exposure to hostile and terrorist activities. It does not recognize however the inherent nature of the VA claims process.

I fully believe this amendment could inspire some wannabees but I feel they would be few and far between.

If a VA psychiatrist or.psychologist etc makes a finding that in their opinion the veteran has PTSD but not from a service connected cause, or event,would that veteran be able via appeal to have the right to a JSRRC verification process?

If a veteran had an independent medical opinion from a mental health provider with PTSD expertise-

would any nexus statement from this private provider be rejected? And if so why?

PTSD veterans have been denied-many times over the last 4 decades-in some cases because VA said their rendition of their stressor did not raise to the level of a stressor as defined by VA.

Could they re-open those claims providing this potential amendment as evidence of new and material evidence?

Prior to the VCAA many veterans with PTSD were denied because the VA said their claim was “not well grounded”?

Could they re-open those claims providing this potential amendment as evidence of new and material evidence?

I appreciate that this proposed rule could begin to reduce the backlog. However, I recently responded to Congressman Filner-Chairman House Veterans Affairs Committee on another matter and added that the backlog due to the remand situation at the BVA is a “re-do” of what regional office employees could have done right in the first place.

The Backlog problems started at the regional office levels and continue at that level.I was awarded Section 1151 DIC in 1997 and a few months ago I succeeded in direct service connected death of my husband. But I had to send to RO a template of what my award letter should have stated.It was the most erroneous award letter I have ever seen, carefully crafted to hope I didn't realize they still owe me plenty of cash.I sent copy of it to the H VAC and to BVA Chairman Terry in response to letters I received from these entities.

The inherent nature of the VA, in my opinion as an advocate, is what should be amended before any proposed rule could possibly benefit veterans or reduce the backlog."

http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#docketDetail?R=VA-2009-VBA-0023

to add here:

( I was angry when I wrote this comment.and still am.

I worked at a vet center and most of the vets I know have PTSD so I know what it is and what it is isn't.SOmeone here took issue with me when I said the word "wannabee" in a prior post.BVut they are few and far between and really dont get very far with the VA anyhow.

This proposed regulation has to be READ OVER very carefully.

Can you imagine some 90 wonder, hired by the VA due to the backlog, who might never have been in the Mil at all -judging whether a stressor raises to the level of a ratable stressor or complies with the criteria in this reg?

The VA has a PTSD criteria for stressors and I posted it here before more than once.The new reg appears to make it easy for combat vets or any vet who served in a war zone to gain PTSD diagnosis and succeed in their PTSD claim.

It "appears" that way until you read it over and over again.

In my opinion this regulation wont make a dent in the backlog ( the Sec's rationale for considering this new reg) and many vets are going to find that it won't work for them.

What gets me ois so much is missing from the reg -and of course I never got any answers to my public comment questions.

Edited August 9, 2010 by Berta (see edit history)

[LarryJ]

I still say, and will continue to say, until proven otherwise by the very VA that wrote this regulation, that we, as veterans claiming PTSD, that those veterans MUST "pass muster" with a VA psychiatrist or board-certified psychologist or a contract VA psych/psychologist. So, your claim is STILL gonna have to be supported by a C&P, by an analysis by the VA psychiatrist/psychologist, to determine whether YOUR "claimed stressor" rises to the level that the VA has set, to be an "approved stressor/event". Annnnndd, what do you DO when the VA says "denied, veteran's claimed stressor does not qualify as a stressor in OUR opinion? The "New Regulation" does not even mention what the VETERAN'S rights are (appeal, DRO, BVA, etc.), not a WORD about what WE can do to reverse this ONE psychiatrist or psychologist opinion.

I don't like it.

I tink dat der's fishes dat ar rottening some ver in Danemark, as my Grandpa would say.

This deal was way TOOOOO good sounding for the Veteran (And, just remember who came up with this deal.......................The VA, right? RIGHT!).

I'm gonna turn in some claims, REALLY GOOD CLAIMS and wait and see what happens. I could turn some in with IMO that the veteran has gotten and paid for on their own, but, I can't do that with a clear conscience. I can't ask a veteran to spend what little money they have left on an IMO, seeing as how the VA has stated that only their psychiatrist/psychologist's word is good when determining PTSD.....that they are right, right out of the chute. How can I turn around and send one of my vets out to spend money on an IMO that is NOT EVEN GONNA BE CITED IN THE SOC AS EVIDENCE?

SO, we wait.

And, I don't like it.

There's implications here that I don't like.

BTW, did I say anything about the fact that I don't like it?

Somebody, ANYBODY, with the VA, do y'all wanna help out an old hardhead jarhead? Then, like Ricky used to say, "LUCY, you got some 'splainin' to do."

[mobie16r]

Questions and Answers on the New Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Regulations

Q. How has VA changed the rules for PTSD?

A. We changed our rules on the evidence you might need if you apply for disability compensation for PTSD.

For years, we’ve made decisions on PTSD applications based on several kinds of situations. The rules have changed for ONE of these situations—the one that’s perhaps been the hardest to prove.

These are the cases where a veteran’s stress came from a fear of hostile military or terrorist actions—but where the veteran wasn’t actually engaged in combat. You might simply have been “near the action,” driving truck or working on a base, for instance, when something very frightening occurred.

For these situations, we’ve made it much easier to “make your case.” We no longer have to come up with records proving that the stressful event occurred.

However, we might have to look for records if the stressful event you describe doesn’t seem to fit with

•The places you served,

•The kind of service you were involved in, and

•The circumstances of your service.

Q. I wonder if PTSD is what I have. Can you tell me how to recognize PTSD?

A. PTSD is an emotional illness. Doctors typically call it an “anxiety disorder.” You might think of it as a kind of chronic psychological stress.

PTSD can occur after you’ve been through a traumatic event. Generally, the traumatic event is something frightening that you see or that happens to you. You may think that your life or others' lives are in danger. Besides feeling afraid, you may think you have no control over what’s happening. If the event occurs in war and other people die, you may have “survivor guilt.”

After the event, you might feel scared, confused, or angry. If these feelings don't go away or they get worse, then you could have PTSD. Symptoms can include

•Recurring memories or dreams of the traumatic event

•Reduced involvement in work or outside interests

•Emotional numbness

•Jumpiness

•Irritability

•Anxiety

Q. Is it true that the new rules don’t apply to every kind of situation?

A. Right. The rules have changed only for one category of case. For the following situations, the rules have not changed:

•Cases where PTSD was already diagnosed in service

•Cases where the veteran was actually engaged in combat

•Cases where a veteran was a prisoner of war

•Cases involving personal assault (including sexual assault) that were not related to enemy actions

Q. How do the new rules work? What kind of proof DO I need?

A. If the “stressor” you describe is related to fear of hostile military or terrorist activity rather than actual combat, we need four things:

•We have to see that the events you describe are consistent with the places, types, and circumstances of your service.

•You must be diagnosed with PTSD, and VA must agree with this diagnosis.

•A psychiatrist or psychologist working for VA has to agree that the events you describe were serious enough to cause PTSD.

•Your symptoms need to be related to the events you describe.

Q. Which veterans are covered by these rules—Is it just Iraq and Afghanistan veterans?

A. No, this rule applies to veterans no matter when they served.

Q. When does the new regulation take effect?

A. It became effective July 13, 2010. It applies to all PTSD claims, including appeals, that are received on or after July 13, 2010.

It also applies to claims that were

•Pending before VA on July 13, 2010

•Pending before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA) on July 13, 2010

•Pending before VA on or after July 13, 2010, because they were overturned by BVA (in cases where the claim was filed before July 13, 2010).

But in these last three situations, we must be reviewing the pending case based “on the merits.” That means that the decision must be about the “meat” of the case and not about a mere technicality.

Q. Why is VA writing this new rule now?

A. First, we needed to make the process easier and quicker for veterans. Second, medical science is always evolving, and we needed to catch up to recent developments.

Q. How will VA handle all the new cases it gets?

A. The Veterans Health Administration is budgeting for more examining physicians to handle the increased volume.

Q. I have a claim (or an appeal) for PTSD pending right now. Is there something I should be doing about the new rule?

A. You don’t have to do anything. We’ve already started using the new regulation.

Q. I applied for PTSD years ago and was denied. Can I reapply now under the new rule?

A. Yes. And you don’t have to fill out another long form. You just need to send us a letter saying you want to reopen your PTSD claim under the revised rule. A couple of sentences will do it. Make sure you add your social security number to the letter.

But keep in mind that the revised rules apply only if your stressful event had to do with hostile or terrorist action and you were not actually engaged in combat. If your denial didn’t have to do with this kind of issue, the new rules may not affect you.

Q. If I do re-open my application, will any payments be retroactive to the date of my first claim?

A. Sorry, no. The earliest the effective date can be is July 13, 2010. And, in order to get this effective date, you need to apply before July 13, 2011.

Q. I believe I have PTSD, but I’ve never applied to VA. How do I start?

A. You can apply at http://vabenefits.vba.va.gov/vonapp/main.asp. Or you can download the form at http://www.vba.va.gov/pubs/forms/VBA-21-526-ARE.pdf. The form tells you everything you need to know.

Q. My own doctor has already diagnosed me with PTSD. Do I have to report for a VA exam?

A. Yes, a VA doctor will have to examine you. But you should submit all the information your doctor is willing to provide.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

[john999]

I think a psychiatrist who is experienced with PTSD knows it when he sees it. Someone who comes back to the world with a thousand yard stare may not have every classic symptom of PTSD. This is the guy who kills himself and the military and family wonder why. A really good shrink can tell if there is something wrong with a person very quickly. If they know the person's history they don't need a chart.

[mobie16r]

I agree with you John999 but this is the va rule,so if the veteran play the game with help from hadit,it will be a win,win

[Bravo6]

Q. I believe I have PTSD, but I've never applied to VA. How do I start?

A. You can apply at http://vabenefits.vb...onapp/main.asp. Or you can download the form at http://www.vba.va.go...21-526-ARE.pdf. The form tells you everything you need to know.

Those links do not work! Can someone give me the correct links! Thanks!

B6

[Gridsmasher11]

OK, Folks..Been out for a few days....I did not start this as an argument about the new regs....First of all..I DO HAVE A VALID DX OF PTSD FROM A VA PSYCHIATRIST........VA HAS CONCEDED MY STRESSOR.......BUT, THE PERSON doing my rating is either not checking my treatment records or is completely ignoring them...At the end of March they denied my clain once again stating that I had PTSD but in the next sentence denying it........SO< WHATS THE PROBLEM?????I DO NOT KNOW...IF I KNEW I WULDN"T HAVE A PROBLEM .....I will continue to get all my stuff together to keep fighting this....GRID

[mobie16r]

Bravo6 try this link www.va.gov/ and it will take you to the Department of Veterans Affairs web page and stroll down and click on va forms when page come up type in the form you want (21-526) if you have a pdf file download on your computer the form will come up

[LarryJ]

OK, Folks..Been out for a few days....I did not start this as an argument about the new regs....First of all..I DO HAVE A VALID DX OF PTSD FROM A VA PSYCHIATRIST........VA HAS CONCEDED MY STRESSOR.......BUT, THE PERSON doing my rating is either not checking my treatment records or is completely ignoring them...At the end of March they denied my clain once again stating that I had PTSD but in the next sentence denying it........SO< WHATS THE PROBLEM?????I DO NOT KNOW...IF I KNEW I WULDN"T HAVE A PROBLEM .....I will continue to get all my stuff together to keep fighting this....GRID

Okay, GRID, so you want to know exactly what the problem is? Check your SOC (Statement Of the Case) letter that you received from the VA. What was the reasoning behind their denial? Did they list ALL the information that they had in their possession in the list of "evidence" that they indicated that they used to reach their decision? Did they, in fact, NOT list anything, any VA Progress Notes that they "overlooked", any pages of diagnosis, ANYTHING?

If you want to, it would be highly helpful to post your decision letter in it's entirety, so we can take a look at it and see if we can cypher their reasoning. Cover all personal information before you do so.

We be here for ya!

[mobie16r]

Grid ,if i was you i would go ahead and submit my claim ASAP,because under the new rule,which was implemented July of 13,your claim should have been granted for PTSD but remember,your ptsd have to be corroborate with your stressor.In other words when you are talkin with your va psy at C&P,you tell he/she everything during your tour of duty in the Gulf war,if you seen people killed of people dead and burning anything that cause you to have nightmares from the gulf war, you have to tell he/she and this have to be the reason you are suffering from ptsd.This is how ptsd is connected to your inservice stressor. It is sad to have to go through this experience again and again but this is what va wants. I hope this helps

[LarryJ]

Grid ,if i was you i would go ahead and submit my claim ASAP,because under the new rule,which was implemented July of 13,your claim should have been granted for PTSD but remember,your ptsd have to be corroborate with your stressor.In other words when you are talkin with your va psy at C&P,you tell he/she everything during your tour of duty in the Gulf war,if you seen people killed of people dead and burning anything that cause you to have nightmares from the gulf war, you have to tell he/she and this have to be the reason you are suffering from ptsd.This is how ptsd is connected to your inservice stressor. It is sad to have to go through this experience again and again but this is what va wants. I hope this helps

Mobie, they have already turned in a claim, and been denied. They need to read their SOC and see WHY they have been denied. They say that they have been diagnosed with PTSD and have a verified stressor and yet were denied. The SOC will have to come up with a reason WHY. Then, and only then, can they righteously fight this thing. Gotta know your enemy before you can beat him, right?

[Former Member]

Gridmashe4r's denial is EXACTLY one good reason why LarryJ and I are quite dubious about the new PTSD criteria.

But they gave a reason for the denial and without knowing the exact way they worded the reason and bases for denial we cannot determine if they could be right or overlooked some very pertinent evidence.which is probably the reason for denial- hard to say-

Also Grid, can you tell us what appellate rights they gave you when you got this?

If the VA says a vet has PTSD and then validates the stressor as it seems to be the case here- did they question that your PTSD did not raise to a ratable level???? They would still however have to grant SC at 0% and I dont think that could possibly happen much.

I am surprised they did deny you but cannot interpret why-as we don't have their reasons yet.

[LarryJ]

Gridmashe4r's denial is EXACTLY one good reason why LarryJ and I are quite dubious about the new PTSD criteria.

But they gave a reason for the denial and without knowing the exact way they worded the reason and bases for denial we cannot determine if they could be right or overlooked some very pertinent evidence.which is probably the reason for denial- hard to say-

Also Grid, can you tell us what appellate rights they gave you when you got this?

If the VA says a vet has PTSD and then validates the stressor as it seems to be the case here- did they question that your PTSD did not raise to a ratable level???? They would still however have to grant SC at 0% and I dont think that could possibly happen much.

I am surprised they did deny you but cannot interpret why-as we don't have their reasons yet.

AHAH! Exactly, Berta, exactly ONE of my points of contention concerning this NEW and IMPROVED PTSD stuff!

You get a diagnosis of PTSD from THE VA................and, you have a validated STRESSOR...................................................and, they deny you because this PTSD does not meet somebody's (a VA "somebody" by-the-way) interpretation of a "ratable" stressor!

and, no way to fight this "somebody". NO WAY.

"me tinks dey is rottening fishes in Danemark, yes.......?"

[GuaymasJim]

I would imagine this exact conversation is occurring all over the nation.

What is the proper procedure to have one's claim reviewed, re-rated, appealed etc. under these new regulations? File a new claim or wait for the VA to take the initiative to apply these new regulations to all these claims (already a 1,000,000 claim backlog):

All PTSD claims, including appeals, that are received on or after July 13, 2010.

All PTSD claims that were:

•Pending before VA on July 13, 2010

•Pending before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA) on July 13, 2010

•Pending before VA on or after July 13, 2010, because they were overturned by BVA (in cases where the claim was filed before July 13, 2010).

But in these last three situations, we must be reviewing the pending case based “on the merits.” That means that the decision must be about the “meat” of the case and not about a mere technicality.

Is having conflicting diagnoses "a mere technicality?"

To the point, the veteran I am assisting falls into the situation outlined by LarryJ and Berta with a couple of twists. First, he has a very long history of PTSD diagnoses from VA mental health providers from both VAMC and Vet Centers as well as a private provider. Secondly, he has been awarded SSDI (2005) based entirely upon his VA medical records.

However, the VA continues to deny service-connected PTSD. For years his was denied because the VA could not, or would not, verify the veteran's presence at a well publicized traumatic event (E Club fragging in VN). The veteran has testimony of a witness who placed the veteran at the event. The VA concluded that the witness was "credible" but the veteran was not. The reasons stated for this, according to the VA, the fact that the veteran has provided several stressors over the years which the VA view as "conflicting" rather the cumulative and evolving renders the veteran and his statements less than credible. Also, the VA states that since neither the witness nor the veteran was listed among the injured and the fact that the witness has never filed for service-connected PTSD, the claimed stressor in not adequate for a service-connected PTSD award. The VA is implying, incorrectly, one or the other (or both) of those elements is required by DSM-IV. The existence of these various other stressors have been revealed during PTSD treatment by VA mental health providers and are noted in the veteran's VA medical records.

JSRRC has confirmed a stressor, but not the stressor claimed (stressor letter) in the original claim for service-connected PTSD. Once the VARO received the confirmation, a new C&P (March 2010) was ordered. The C&P report states that the veteran does not suffer from PTSD but does suffer from a Personality Disorder and Depression disorder. The C&P report conflicts with VA medical records which contain numerous PTSD diagnoses right up to the C&P and continuing until as recently as two weeks ago.

The claim is very old and has traveled a very strange route. The denial was appealed to the Board in 2006 with an in-person hearing with a traveling Board member requested, but sat somewhere at the Houston RO for three years without action. So, like so many others, we cannot determine how these new regulations apply to this veteran's claim nor how to use them for his benefit (or detriment for that matter).

These questions must be answered:

Do 38 CFR "Relative Equipoise" provisions still apply?

(38 U.S.C 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990)

Do 38 CFR "Benefit of the Doubt" provisions still apply?

(38 U.S.C.A. § 1110, 5107 (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303 (2002)

Do 38 CFR "Preponderance of the Evidence" provisions still apply?

(38 U.S.C. § 5110(a); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400 (2001)

Do 38 CFR "VA required to analyze and evaluate ... all pertinent medical and lay evidence" still apply?

(38 U.S.C. § 1154(a) (2000); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a) (2002)

If the answer to any of these questions is "No", then veterans seeking service-connected PTSD ratings have been handed their butts!

To make it all the more confusing for us, in an IRIS response to the question of where the claim was in the appeals process, the VACO informed the veteran of the new regulations with the inference that the new regulations would help the veteran. However, shortly thereafter another SSOC was received containing yet another denial but this time stating that the veteran has a confirmed stressor but doesn't suffer from PTSD. The veteran submitted another Form 9 which simply said to refer to the 2006 Form 9 and a cover letter requesting that the RO expedite forwarding the appeal to the Board (including the in-person hearing in front of a traveling Board member at a local VA facility) based on the enormous delay that has already occurred. The veteran has received no response to date. So, we have no idea how the new regulations can or will impact the claim. Hell, we really don't even know where the claim actually (physically) is in the appeals process.

Another question has surfaced, at least for us, regarding these new regulations. If we assume, and I believe we have to at least for now, that it takes a PTSD diagnosis from a VA provider**and only a VA provider**would an IMO from a non-VA practitioner with a specialty in employment issues have any value in determining the actual rating % should be veteran succeed in getting an award of service-connected PTSD? More simply asked, "Do private mental health professionals have any relevance to the diagnosis and treatment of veterans suffering from PTSD? (I wonder what those professionals feel about these new regulations!)

While I realize I have asked more questions than I have answered, I hope this adds additional information to advance the conversation. If anyone has any answers or ideas on how to proceed, I suspect many of us would certainly like see them. If we receive more information I will post it.

Thanks.

[mobie16r]

ok, i am through with this,because i have no wind. 100% service connected for post traumatic stress disorder

[cooter]

I would imagine this exact conversation is occurring all over the nation.

What is the proper procedure to have one's claim reviewed, re-rated, appealed etc. under these new regulations? File a new claim or wait for the VA to take the initiative to apply these new regulations to all these claims (already a 1,000,000 claim backlog):

All PTSD claims, including appeals, that are received on or after July 13, 2010.

All PTSD claims that were:

•Pending before VA on July 13, 2010

•Pending before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA) on July 13, 2010

•Pending before VA on or after July 13, 2010, because they were overturned by BVA (in cases where the claim was filed before July 13, 2010).

But in these last three situations, we must be reviewing the pending case based "on the merits." That means that the decision must be about the "meat" of the case and not about a mere technicality.

Is having conflicting diagnoses "a mere technicality?"

To the point, the veteran I am assisting falls into the situation outlined by LarryJ and Berta with a couple of twists. First, he has a very long history of PTSD diagnoses from VA mental health providers from both VAMC and Vet Centers as well as a private provider. Secondly, he has been awarded SSDI (2005) based entirely upon his VA medical records.

However, the VA continues to deny service-connected PTSD. For years his was denied because the VA could not, or would not, verify the veteran's presence at a well publicized traumatic event (E Club fragging in VN). The veteran has testimony of a witness who placed the veteran at the event. The VA concluded that the witness was "credible" but the veteran was not. The reasons stated for this, according to the VA, the fact that the veteran has provided several stressors over the years which the VA view as "conflicting" rather the cumulative and evolving renders the veteran and his statements less than credible. Also, the VA states that since neither the witness nor the veteran was listed among the injured and the fact that the witness has never filed for service-connected PTSD, the claimed stressor in not adequate for a service-connected PTSD award. The VA is implying, incorrectly, one or the other (or both) of those elements is required by DSM-IV. The existence of these various other stressors have been revealed during PTSD treatment by VA mental health providers and are noted in the veteran's VA medical records.

JSRRC has confirmed a stressor, but not the stressor claimed (stressor letter) in the original claim for service-connected PTSD. Once the VARO received the confirmation, a new C&P (March 2010) was ordered. The C&P report states that the veteran does not suffer from PTSD but does suffer from a Personality Disorder and Depression disorder. The C&P report conflicts with VA medical records which contain numerous PTSD diagnoses right up to the C&P and continuing until as recently as two weeks ago.

The claim is very old and has traveled a very strange route. The denial was appealed to the Board in 2006 with an in-person hearing with a traveling Board member requested, but sat somewhere at the Houston RO for three years without action. So, like so many others, we cannot determine how these new regulations apply to this veteran's claim nor how to use them for his benefit (or detriment for that matter).

These questions must be answered:

Do 38 CFR "Relative Equipoise" provisions still apply?

(38 U.S.C 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990)

Do 38 CFR "Benefit of the Doubt" provisions still apply?

(38 U.S.C.A. § 1110, 5107 (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303 (2002)

Do 38 CFR "Preponderance of the Evidence" provisions still apply?

(38 U.S.C. § 5110(a); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400 (2001)

Do 38 CFR "VA required to analyze and evaluate ... all pertinent medical and lay evidence" still apply?

(38 U.S.C. § 1154(a) (2000); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a) (2002)

If the answer to any of these questions is "No", then veterans seeking service-connected PTSD ratings have been handed their butts!

To make it all the more confusing for us, in an IRIS response to the question of where the claim was in the appeals process, the VACO informed the veteran of the new regulations with the inference that the new regulations would help the veteran. However, shortly thereafter another SSOC was received containing yet another denial but this time stating that the veteran has a confirmed stressor but doesn't suffer from PTSD. The veteran submitted another Form 9 which simply said to refer to the 2006 Form 9 and a cover letter requesting that the RO expedite forwarding the appeal to the Board (including the in-person hearing in front of a traveling Board member at a local VA facility) based on the enormous delay that has already occurred. The veteran has received no response to date. So, we have no idea how the new regulations can or will impact the claim. Hell, we really don't even know where the claim actually (physically) is in the appeals process.

Another question has surfaced, at least for us, regarding these new regulations. If we assume, and I believe we have to at least for now, that it takes a PTSD diagnosis from a VA provider**and only a VA provider**would an IMO from a non-VA practitioner with a specialty in employment issues have any value in determining the actual rating % should be veteran succeed in getting an award of service-connected PTSD? More simply asked, "Do private mental health professionals have any relevance to the diagnosis and treatment of veterans suffering from PTSD? (I wonder what those professionals feel about these new regulations!)

While I realize I have asked more questions than I have answered, I hope this adds additional information to advance the conversation. If anyone has any answers or ideas on how to proceed, I suspect many of us would certainly like see them. If we receive more information I will post it.

Thanks.

OK, with all this said I still need a little more clarification on a few subjects. 1. When a vet files for PTSD does he at the time submit evidence from his/her private

psychiatrist with the diagnosed symptoms of PTSD since IMO's and EMO's won't be admissible? 2. What decides the rating %? The vets testimony on the severity of

their symptoms or who or what? I'm kind of confused of what evidence IS admissible.

[retiredat44]

None on my VA doctors would help write me a nexus letter. I used to ask them..

(I also asked a few VA doctors to help me by writing a nexus).. I also told VA surgeons where I was injured when they asked me what my injuries were.. and where I got them..

I had to go pay an outside specialist to write an IMO and it was $1,600

I just returned from an appointment with my VA psychiatrist....She just seems to want to keep increasing my meds but doesn't really want to help with my claim.....I asked her to specifically write me a nexus letter or to put into my treatment notes that my PTSD 'is more likely than not caused by my time in the Gulf"....She says that she has already stated that it is service connected and that she wants me to be service connected for this but will not write this as I have asked....Are they instructed to not write it plainly so we can support our claims????? She said it would be a conflict of interest.????I asked her how it would be a conflict of interest, wasn't she my treating Phsychiatrist (she said yes) but she just wants to him and haww........GRRRRRRRRR...VA causes us more stress and just wants to dope us up and hope we forget...............................................Did find out some things that may help my claim......The doctor that did my PTSD C&P back in March is only an MD.....According to VA regs it should have been a Psychiatrist or Phsycologist...So I have a point there....Still gathering the stuff to keep fighting my claim.............................GRID

Edited August 19, 2010 by retiredat44 (see edit history)

[Former Member]

Jim- I raised that exact issue with COngressman Filner last night at SVR radio-

Veterans with PD diagnosis have in some cases proven to the VA they had, in fact, PTSD.

The new regs specifiy that the diagnosis MUST come from a VA mental health care practitioner.

This means, I mentioned, that if the VA says the vet doesnt have PTSD but he or she has the diagnosis from an independent doctor and conforms to the stressor criteria then how do these vets receive 38 USC 1154 b Benefit of Doubt- that allows the VA to weigh evidence for and against the claim-and if of equal merit -then veteran will succeed.

His response to this part of the reg was " We are going to look into that." and "Congress can make some changes."

He was fully aware of how this reg was worded. I raised the fact that this could be a situation that impacts on the H VAC hearings on Personality Disorder diagnoses which will be on Sept 15 at the Cannon Building in DC available live in streaming video.

I intend to send him a letter too again mentioning these concerns that every vets advocate should be concerned about as well.

If VA can attempt to erode any of our DTA and Benefit of Doubt rights we cannot sit by and allow them to do that.

The VA is probably the best in the world at diagnosing and treating PTSD hands down-

but they have certainly misdiagnosed PTSD as PD or any other non service connectable disability- Congressman Filner even briefly mentioned with no names the PTSD fiasco a few years ago (it was the Norma Perez bull crap)

and the H VAC is very aware of how PTSD has been "downplayed" by VA in attempts to not award compensation for it.

We cannot allow any VA erosion to any of these regs you stated:

"Do 38 CFR "Relative Equipoise" provisions still apply?

(38 U.S.C 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990)

Do 38 CFR "Benefit of the Doubt" provisions still apply?

(38 U.S.C.A. § 1110, 5107 (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303 (2002)

Do 38 CFR "Preponderance of the Evidence" provisions still apply?

(38 U.S.C. § 5110(a); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400 (2001)

Do 38 CFR "VA required to analyze and evaluate ... all pertinent medical and lay evidence" still apply?

(38 U.S.C. § 1154(a) (2000); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a) (2002)"

RE and BOD regs are the foundation of -and as I mention to COngressman Filner the reason why- many many claims that do get awarded.