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

Old Or New Ptsd Rule

Rate this question


Papa

Question

I do know that when I did my first C&P for PTSD, I was under the old rule. But, last Oct 2010, the VA decided that I needed to be retested, so would I be under the new rule for PTSD? I'm still waiting a ruling for the second C&P. I personally do not believe that the VA is interested in non-combat PTSD, only combat PTSD. Unfortunately, I have both.

Papa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Answers 15
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters For This Question

Popular Days

Top Posters For This Question

Recommended Posts

  • HadIt.com Elder

Roberson

You are making a circular argument and discussing "original intent" of the law. Just tell me what the orginal intent of the new PTSD rules are? If you want to challange everyone one who knows something about this rule then defend your position. Don't run away. When you argue with people who have been studying this stuff for years you need to expect some opposition. The idea here is to get PTSD claims accepted. Are you SC for PTSD under knew rules?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to further argue this point but:

"as the VA itself recognizes in routinely accepting private medical opinions assessing PTSD in veterans when the in-service stressor has been established."

I think the keys words here are the fact that the stressor has been "established."

A private MH doctor cannot 'establish 'that a stressor occurred only that the PTSD is more than likely due to an inservice event-establishing a stressor is when the VA verifies a stressor.

Unless the private doctor served with the vet and witnessed the actual stressor themselves.

It could happen- my husband's initial diagnosis and confirmation of his stressor came from the Director of the Newark VA who was familiar with the USMC unit he was in and also the national news he recalled reading due to this terrible event.

He had gone to the VA that day for a business loan and came out with PTSD diagnosis and confirmed stressor due to an unfortunate event and a flashback.No loan- just copy of the 526 form.They started his claim the very same day.

I think in 1992 they also verified some of his other stressors too via JSRRC.

Our former PTSD psychiatrist at the local VAMC also served in Vietnam but I dont know if he ever treated any vet whose stressor he could confirm himself but it is possible.

If a vet cannot prove their stressor not even Sigmund Freud's IMO could help them (in my opinion).

GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University !

When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief

Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was

simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we."

Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sorry I still disagree with you and I think I talked to Rich Cohen before I even did the article for Watchdog but in any event-

Here is the NOVA Petition:

http://www.vetadvocates.com/PTSDRuleChallenge.pdf

And no here really wants confrontation- but we all need accurate info.

GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University !

When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief

Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was

simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we."

Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Better yet here is Rich Cohen's email addy:

rich2wvajustice.com

His last response to me was:

"Berta:

As you know, NOVA was the first group to challenge the new PTSD regulations. Thereafter PVA and Veterans of Modern Warfare and NVLSP filed regulation challenges. The two other challenges have been consolidated with NOVA's rule challenge. See the attached notice of consolidated caption.

Rich"

and stuff was attached

(Rich Cohen- NOVA)

The other orgs as well could be emailed for their explanation of the NOVA petition.

Please let us know what he says as to the point you are making.

GRADUATE ! Nov 2nd 2007 American Military University !

When thousands of Americans faced annihilation in the 1800s Chief

Osceola's response to his people, the Seminoles, was

simply "They(the US Army)have guns, but so do we."

Sameo to us -They (VA) have 38 CFR ,38 USC, and M21-1- but so do we.

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

    • Lebro earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • spazbototto earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Paul Gretza earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Troy Spurlock went up a rank
      Community Regular
    • KMac1181 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