Jump to content

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

  • tbirds-va-claims-struggle (1).png

  • 01-2024-stay-online-donate-banner.png

     

  • 0

Stressor Conceded

Rate this question


68mustang

Question

I received a copy of my c-file the other day. I found a copy of a VA form 21-6789 that has a JSRRC review that was done on my stressors. The review states that my stressor is conceded. The only stressor that was conceded was the stressor for the hazing I had while aboard ship, which amounted to MST.

The JSRRC review has noted on it as to what the examiner should do:

"Please ask examiner:

Please exam for PTSD. The stressor is conceded based on veteran being involved in a hazing incident that happened aboard the ship".

I had two separate C&P exams administered by different examiners one for PTSD and one for depression

The C&P examiner's report for PTSD states that "Does the veteran meet the DSM-IV stressor criterion? No"

"Does the veteran meet the DSM-IV criteria for a diagnosis for PTSD? No"

The PTSD C&P examiners report also states in the medical opinion that:

"Rationale for opinion given vet does not qualify for diagnosis of PTSD; he does have a depressed mood though but it is hard to determine whether depression is due to stressors cited while in the Navy; I cannot determine exact cause of depression without resorting to speculation".

I did get rated at 10% for depression by the C&P depression examiner and the examiner's opinion was that it was for depression secondary to tinnitus, hearing loss, in-service hazing and traumatic assaults that I experienced. The C&P exam for PTSD does not address the MST and the separate exam for depression refers to the MST as traumatic assaults. I would like to see if I can get it rated higher if I don't meet the criteria for PTSD.

The copy of the VA form 21-6789 with the JSRRC review does not show up in the evidence used listing. Plus the rater stated the GAF that was assigned by both examiners was a "65", but in realty it was a"60" on both. Don't know if the above mentioned items make a difference.Can anyone please offer some advice on what I can do when I file an NOD on this. Thanks.

68mustang

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 18
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Recommended Posts

68,

This is only my opinion, but my answer to your question as posed, would

be, NO.

The only factor in the Schedule for MH percentage criteria, that addresses

medication for the condition is the 10 percent level, which you already have.

The amount of medication is not addressed in the Schedule.

Now, hopefully other's will chime in on this, but it is also my opinion

that you might be able to claim another condition as secondary to

the effects of the medication.

General Rating Formula for Mental Disorders:

Total occupational and social impairment, due to

such symptoms as: gross impairment in thought

processes or communication; persistent delusions

or hallucinations; grossly inappropriate behavior;

persistent danger of hurting self or others;

intermittent inability to perform activities of

daily living (including maintenance of minimal

personal hygiene); disorientation to time or

place; memory loss for names of close relatives,

own occupation, or own name... 100

Occupational and social impairment, with

deficiencies in most areas, such as work, school,

family relations, judgment, thinking, or mood, due

to such symptoms as: suicidal ideation;

obsessional rituals which interfere with routine

activities; speech intermittently illogical,

obscure, or irrelevant; near-continuous panic or

depression affecting the ability to function

independently, appropriately and effectively;

impaired impulse control (such as unprovoked

irritability with periods of violence); spatial

disorientation; neglect of personal appearance and

hygiene; difficulty in adapting to stressful

circumstances (including work or a work like

setting); inability to establish and maintain

effective relationships… 70

Occupational and social impairment with reduced

reliability and productivity due to such symptoms

as: flattened affect; circumstantial,

circumlocutory, or stereotyped speech; panic

attacks more than once a week; difficulty in

understanding complex commands; impairment of

short- and long-term memory (e.g., retention of

only highly learned material, forgetting to

complete tasks); impaired judgment; impaired

abstract thinking; disturbances of motivation and

mood; difficulty in establishing and maintaining

effective work and social relationships… 50

Occupational and social impairment with occasional

decrease in work efficiency and intermittent

periods of inability to perform occupational tasks

(although generally functioning satisfactorily,

with routine behavior, self-care, and conversation

normal), due to such symptoms as: depressed mood,

anxiety, suspiciousness, panic attacks (weekly or

less often), chronic sleep impairment, mild memory

loss (such as forgetting names, directions, recent

events)… 30

Occupational and social impairment due to mild or

transient symptoms which decrease work efficiency

and ability to perform occupational tasks only

during periods of significant stress, or; symptoms

controlled by continuous medication… 10

Carlie passed away in November 2015 she is missed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

68,

This is only my opinion, but my answer to your question as posed, would

be, NO.

The only factor in the Schedule for MH percentage criteria, that addresses

medication for the condition is the 10 percent level, which you already have.

The amount of medication is not addressed in the Schedule.

Now, hopefully other's will chime in on this, but it is also my opinion

that you might be able to claim another condition as secondary to

the effects of the medication.

Occupational and social impairment with occasional

decrease in work efficiency and intermittent

periods of inability to perform occupational tasks

(although generally functioning satisfactorily,

with routine behavior, self-care, and conversation

normal), due to such symptoms as: depressed mood,

anxiety, suspiciousness, panic attacks (weekly or

less often), chronic sleep impairment, mild memory

loss (such as forgetting names, directions, recent

events)… 30

Carlie or anyone else please I need your help.

Do you know if you have to meet all the symptoms describe under the 30% rating to get an increase from 10%? I think I was lowballed and will be filing an NOD because of some missing info in the C&P exam for depression. Thanks.

68mustang

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carlie or anyone else please I need your help.

Do you know if you have to meet all the symptoms describe under the 30% rating to get an increase from 10%? I think I was lowballed and will be filing an NOD because of some missing info in the C&P exam for depression. Thanks.

68mustang

68,

You do not have to meet all of the symptoms but you do have to meet the majority

of them.

I would go thru my medical evidence of record and see what symptoms I do meet

in writing from doctor's and then compare the evidence to both the

10 percent and 30 percent criteria.

Also, if this is additional medical evidence versus the evidence of record at the time the decision

was made (and if I had plenty of time on the NOD clock) -

I would submit the additional evidence and ask that the percentage level of disability assigned, be reconsidered.

Carlie passed away in November 2015 she is missed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

68,

You do not have to meet all of the symptoms but you do have to meet the majority

of them.

I would go thru my medical evidence of record and see what symptoms I do meet

in writing from doctor's and then compare the evidence to both the

10 percent and 30 percent criteria.

Also, if this is additional medical evidence versus the evidence of record at the time the decision

was made (and if I had plenty of time on the NOD clock) -

I would submit the additional evidence and ask that the percentage level of disability assigned, be reconsidered.

Carlie,

Thank you very much for your response. Yes I do have more new evidence and I have until March 22,2011 to file the NOD. However I am waiting to hear on deferred claim which has been in limbo since March 22,2210. After repeated attempts to get the Houston RO to provide a detail response as what the holdup is on the deferred claim all the VA will respond with is "we are still working on it". The responses have been through IRIS and letters from the VA. This Thursday I want to go file an NOD on the depression rating to see if I can get it higher. Also include an NOD for the denial for asbestosis and I have new medical evidence and evidence that the VA totally ignored yet was in their possession. Plus it was not adjudicated in accordance with the M21 that was posted on hadit (YEA and thanks to James Breckenridge and you). Plus since the VA will not give a definitive answer on the deferred claim I want to add that to the NOD. Any thoughts on what I just stated? Thanks.

68mustang

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever you do don't wait to the last minute to file the NOD. You have a year to file but don't wait 364 days.

john999

Thanks for the response. Someone had advised me to go ahead and include the deferred claim in my NOD, but I can't remember who. So do you think I should include it even if by some miracle the VA sends me a decision in the near future? Could there be some repercussions if I do and the VA approves or denies the deferred claim? Thanks.

68mustang

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Tell a friend

    Love HadIt.com’s VA Disability Community Vets helping Vets since 1997? Tell a friend!
  • Recent Achievements

    • kidva earned a badge
      First Post
    • kidva earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Lebro earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • spazbototto earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Paul Gretza earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Our picks

    • These decisions have made a big impact on how VA disability claims are handled, giving veterans more chances to get benefits and clearing up important issues.

      Service Connection

      Frost v. Shulkin (2017)
      This case established that for secondary service connection claims, the primary service-connected disability does not need to be service-connected or diagnosed at the time the secondary condition is incurred 1. This allows veterans to potentially receive secondary service connection for conditions that developed before their primary condition was officially service-connected. 

      Saunders v. Wilkie (2018)
      The Federal Circuit ruled that pain alone, without an accompanying diagnosed condition, can constitute a disability for VA compensation purposes if it results in functional impairment 1. This overturned previous precedent that required an underlying pathology for pain to be considered a disability.

      Effective Dates

      Martinez v. McDonough (2023)
      This case dealt with the denial of an earlier effective date for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) 2. It addressed issues around the validity of appeal withdrawals and the consideration of cognitive impairment in such decisions.

      Rating Issues

      Continue Reading on HadIt.com
      • 0 replies
    • I met with a VSO today at my VA Hospital who was very knowledgeable and very helpful.  We decided I should submit a few new claims which we did.  He told me that he didn't need copies of my military records that showed my sick call notations related to any of the claims.  He said that the VA now has entire military medical record on file and would find the record(s) in their own file.  It seemed odd to me as my service dates back to  1981 and spans 34 years through my retirement in 2015.  It sure seemed to make more sense for me to give him copies of my military medical record pages that document the injuries as I'd already had them with me.  He didn't want my copies.  Anyone have any information on this.  Much thanks in advance.  
      • 4 replies
    • Caluza Triangle defines what is necessary for service connection
      Caluza Triangle – Caluza vs Brown defined what is necessary for service connection. See COVA– CALUZA V. BROWN–TOTAL RECALL

      This has to be MEDICALLY Documented in your records:

      Current Diagnosis.   (No diagnosis, no Service Connection.)

      In-Service Event or Aggravation.
      Nexus (link- cause and effect- connection) or Doctor’s Statement close to: “The Veteran’s (current diagnosis) is at least as likely due to x Event in military service”
      • 0 replies
    • Do the sct codes help or hurt my disability rating 
    • VA has gotten away with (mis) interpreting their  ambigious, , vague regulations, then enforcing them willy nilly never in Veterans favor.  

      They justify all this to congress by calling themselves a "pro claimant Veteran friendly organization" who grants the benefit of the doubt to Veterans.  

      This is not true, 

      Proof:  

          About 80-90 percent of Veterans are initially denied by VA, pushing us into a massive backlog of appeals, or worse, sending impoverished Veterans "to the homeless streets" because  when they cant work, they can not keep their home.  I was one of those Veterans who they denied for a bogus reason:  "Its been too long since military service".  This is bogus because its not one of the criteria for service connection, but simply made up by VA.  And, I was a homeless Vet, albeit a short time,  mostly due to the kindness of strangers and friends. 

          Hadit would not be necessary if, indeed, VA gave Veterans the benefit of the doubt, and processed our claims efficiently and paid us promptly.  The VA is broken. 

          A huge percentage (nearly 100 percent) of Veterans who do get 100 percent, do so only after lengthy appeals.  I have answered questions for thousands of Veterans, and can only name ONE person who got their benefits correct on the first Regional Office decision.  All of the rest of us pretty much had lengthy frustrating appeals, mostly having to appeal multiple multiple times like I did. 

          I wish I know how VA gets away with lying to congress about how "VA is a claimant friendly system, where the Veteran is given the benefit of the doubt".   Then how come so many Veterans are homeless, and how come 22 Veterans take their life each day?  Va likes to blame the Veterans, not their system.   
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines and Terms of Use