On The Legal Side Couldn't This Be A Conflict Of Interest...

[rpowell01]

Its my understanding that an RO is suppose to send veterans to have an independent C&P exam. If an RO is part of a system say as in St Pete, the Bay Pines system, how can they send a veteran to have a C&P exam in the Bay Pines Region only and not other regions such as Tampa or lets say Orlando. Wouldn't this be a conflict of interest because the word independent?

I am just curious about this because I see the RO using doctors in their system is a conflict of interest.

[harleyman]

Free_spirit- I have never seen an acutual independent medical exam. I am seem many opinion exams, ans seen examiners asked to resolve conflicting opinions, but an actual IME request by the RO, I have not seen one ordered at the RO level. I have seen exams ordered by BVA to resove issues by not the RO. It would be something that would be advised by General Councel, or the Comp and pen services manager probably out of D.C.

Initially, the file will go on to appeals prior to a IME being called, as the VA like to use thier own doctor's to provide a record review and opinion. Like the one they did to your case, no exam but a report to appear as an exam.

[free_spirit_etc]

This doesn't say it has to be independent.

3.159©(4)

Providing medical examinations or obtaining medical opinions. (i) In a claim for disability compensation, VA will provide a medical examination or obtain a medical opinion based upon a review of the evidence of record if VA determines it is necessary to decide the claim. A medical examination or medical opinion is necessary if the information and evidence of record does not contain sufficient competent medical evidence to decide the claim, but:

(A) Contains competent lay or medical evidence of a current diagnosed disability or persistent or recurrent symptoms of disability;

(B) Establishes that the veteran suffered an event, injury or disease in service, or has a disease or symptoms of a disease listed in ? 3.309, ? 3.313, ? 3.316, and ? 3.317 manifesting during an applicable presumptive period provided the claimant has the required service or triggering event to qualify for that presumption; and

© Indicates that the claimed disability or symptoms may be associated with the established event, injury, or disease in service or with another service-connected disability.

(ii) Paragraph (4)(i)© could be satisfied by competent evidence showing post-service treatment for a condition, or other possible association with military service.

(iii) Paragraph ©(4) applies to a claim to reopen a finally adjudicated claim only if new and material evidence is presented or secured.

[free_spirit_etc]

Harleyman,

I doubt the RO would do many Independent Exams or Opinions. It looks like they can, but it has to be approved way up the chain.

And though it is aggravating that the VA examiners often times try to write opinions to deny claims, I don't think the law requires them to be independent.

I don't think there is any actual legal conflict of interest. Moral and ethical conflicts, YES! - But not legal....

[carlie]

Bottom line is that C&P exams,( if there is enough evidence to require one) are ordered

and scheduled as a part of duty to assist and due process.

[harleyman]

I am not saying illegal, no not illegal just morally tilted.

I am saying at the RO they talk about IMOs being requested. When they used this term, they are talking about finding a doctor who will do the exam, who is not intertwined with the VA, And those exams are at the recomendation of the General Councel or CO, appeals , BVA etc.

The exams the VA orders for C&P exams is standard. Once in awhile an exam is returned to a third doctor (at VA) to reconcile a difference of opinion between the Vet's private doctor and the VA examiner. Then they go ahead with a different VA examiner and ask for an opionion. (Is it an IMO?..NO) but the VA does have situation where an IMO in necessary, I just have not see one ordered, they are very few and far between.

I do not believe a regular VA C&P is considered illegal, but morally I have a different feeling about it too. I think we are in agreement here.

Edited September 29, 2013 by harleyman

[free_spirit_etc]

Yep. I think we are all in agreement. I like the term "morally tilted." It sounds much more "politically correct" than saying "unethical snakes" or "purely evil intentions."