Doctors Letter

[JohnM]

John will be going to the VA office on Aug 2nd. I wrote a 4 page letter out about all of John's problems including about how his depression, paranoia and anger play in. Took the letter to the Dr. yesterday and he said it sounds good and wanted to know if there was a form that he should fill out to confirm what I said or are we to wait till VA contacts him. The Dr. is very much willing to help us out with this.

Thanks in advance for your input.

John's Wife

[Berta]

"If Because he has Spina Bifida Occulta being that was a preexciting berore enlistment if that was the begining of his back problems. No that was not written down on his physical they "

If this was not on his Pre induction physical or noted in his SMRs or on his discharge physical-

there will be major problems with that claim- unless he has treatment records during or shortly after his service for this condition-

my opinion only-

I suggest that-since I think he is an incountry Vietnam vet?-

to focus on the DMII claim and anything possibly secondary to the DMII and also focus on the PTSD claim- these- to me are the prime issues and far easier to support with evidence than attempting to service connect the spinal disability issue--

If he is not employed and gets SSA disability for PTSD or the DMII or any of it's secondary problems-or if any doctor tells him his DMII and/or PTSD render him unemployable (and if they document this)

he should file a TDIU form-regardless of what the vet rep says-

The TDIU form does not exclude veterans who are not rated yet.

By filing the form, the veteran preserves their entitlement date if future SC awards and medical evidence reveal they had TDIU potential when the form was actually filed.

SAy vet get SSA for PTSD -as of Nov 1, 2004.

Vet then gets 30% SC PTSD award from VA entitlement date to Dec 2005.

Lets say Vet had filed the TDIU form on Nov 1, 2004 referring to her SSA award.

The vet should NOD the EED on the Dec 2005 retro and she should remind them of the TDIU claim she filed.

Say another vet files for PTSD and gets 30%-in 2004.Doesn't NOD it. Lets say the veteran's medical evidence certainly supports a TDIU rating and the vet is unemployed due to his PTSD rendering him-as well as the meds- unable to work-

he fails to file for SSA.

Then in Feb 2006 he re-opens his claim with a TDIU application.

The VA awards TDIU-based on his medical evidence-back to Feb 2006.

This vet has lost significant retro if his medical evidence could have supported TDIU award all along-

just my opinion-

I send many vets- preparing NODs, the TDIU to attach to it.I dont care if they are still rated as NSC or have no SC rating at all.

If a veteran's SC (or eventual probable award of SC disability)renders them unemployable, I say- file the TDIU form- regardless of what a vet rep says.

They cannot produce a regulation from 38 CFR that prohibits TDIU consideration if the veteran's medical evidence supports TDIU.

[huskerfanfl]

Berta is right as usual.

Bear in mind that while we all admire you for writing a letter in support of your husband, he will need to talk to the VA shrink in order to be able to be evaluated for PTSD, It is one thing for a loved one to say he has the symptoms and had talked about things with family members, but without some type of formal evaluation this would be a very difficult thing to prove.

From what I understand if he was in VietNam and has the correct awards on his discharge paperwork then he will not have to deal with a stressor letter, he just needs to have the evaluation of PTSD.

[Guest jangrin]

JohnM,

You guys have come a long way since your first posts on the board. It is really a lot to take in all at once, I know because my husband and I are relatively new at all this ourselves. My husband has not recieved any rating yet. We just got an IMO from Dr. Bash and the first thing he said was to make sure the TDIU was filed for. Our SO wanted us to wait on the TDIU, but you loose the retro. We decided to go ahead and send it in and we made a copy for her and for the AL guy. She wasn't happy but when she saw the report from Dr. Bash connecting the DMII and heart condition to military service she changed her mind about the TDIU.

Ultimately it's your decision and you need to feel comfortable with the process and your own "battle plan".

Good Luck in your quest,

Jangrin

Edited August 10, 2006 by jangrin

[free_spirit_etc]

http://www.haditveteransforum.com/30701.htm

Having found a claim for TDIU, we consider Roberson’s entitlement to TDIU under 38 C.F.R. § 3.340(a)(1), dating back to the 1984 rating decision. Roberson alleges that, in determining his eligibility for TDIU, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims misinterpreted section 3.340(a)(1). This section stated, at the time the RO evaluated Roberson’s claim, "[t]otal disability will be considered to exist when there is present any impairment of mind or body which is sufficient to render it impossible for the average person to follow a substantially gainful occupation." 38 C.F.R. § 3.340(a)(1) (1983) (emphasis added). Roberson asserts that the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims misconstrued "substantially gainful occupation" to mean "100% unemployable." Roberson bases his allegation on the court’s statement that "there was sufficient evidence of record at the time of the RO’s January 1984 decision to reasonably conclude that the veteran was not 100% unemployable." Roberson v. West, No. 97-1971, slip op. at 6. Roberson asserts that the plain language of the regulation does not require the veteran to show 100 percent unemployability in order to prove that he cannot "follow substantially gainful occupation." We agree.

Requiring a veteran to prove that he is 100 percent unemployable is different than requiring the veteran to prove that he cannot maintain substantially gainful employment. The use of the word "substantially" suggests an intent to impart flexibility into a determination of the veterans overall employability, whereas a requirement that the veteran prove 100 percent unemployability leaves no flexibility. While the term "substantially gainful occupation" may not set a clear numerical standard for determining TDIU, it does indicate an amount less than 100 percent.

Having concluded that proving inability to maintain "substantially gainful occupation" does not require proving 100 percent unemployability, we remand to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for a determination of Roberson’s eligibility for TDIU in accordance with this opinion.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that the Court of Appeals for Veterans claims erred in holding that Roberson failed to make a claim for TDIU, and erred in applying an incorrect standard for TDIU.

REVERSED and REMANDED

[john999]

Even if you are a combat vet with combat awards you still have to compose a stressor letter. The difference is that the VA has to take your word for it if it is in the realm of possibility. If you don't have the combat awards you have to pretty much prove the stressor.

[RockyA1911]

I did not have to prepare or furnish a stressor letter at all. I did have combat awards on my DD-214. The C&P examiner assessed GAF of 52 and diagnosed Chronic PTSD, Depression, and cognitive disorder. Of course the C&P was done in Jul of 05 and I have yet to receive a decsion on my claim........going on 18 months now. They said it is in a ready to rate status.

Should I prepare a stressor letter at this late stage of the game and send it in John?

Will the VARO deny my claim due to lack of not composing a stressor letter? The C&P examiner stated "PTSD is conceded" in the report.

Edited August 11, 2006 by RockyA1911