Dro Review?

[Josephine]

If the DRO issues you a SOC, then you also have 60 days from that SOC to submit VA Form 9 and your claim will be sent to the BVA. Keep in mind that once you receive a SOC, regardless of who issued it (the rating activity or the DRO) you can also submit additional "new" evidence within 60 days of the SOC and the regional office has to consider them and either grant the benefit sought on appeal based on the additional evidence, or they will issue a Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC). If the VA issues A SSOC, you then have 60 days from the SSOC to either submit addtional "new" evidence to be considered, which will then prompt either another SSOC or a grant in benefits, or submit VA Form 9 to have your claim sent to the BVA. Also keep in mind "new" evidence is evidence that the VA did not have in its possession of the time of the previous decision, it can not be redundant evidence.

This is where you guys are loosing me?

I received a SOC - My SOC stated - it looks like your claim may be denied due to Personality Disorder, so I am sending you a form 9 to turn in within 60 days.

The Same Letter Stated - This is Not the DRO'S Final Decision, as I am sending you for a C&P.

Okey - dokey- I ask the counselors about the Form - 9. They state, you have been denied, turn in that Form 9.

I fill out the Form 9 and turn it in to the R. O

In the meantime, I receive the C&P with a More Likely than Not.

Transferred and Received another C&P by the Board of Two - Nothing Bothered her in service

Turn in Rebuttal to Medical Center and R. O for New C&P due to legalities.

I acquire letter from my Military Treating Physician - 40 years back to 1964, Send him all my SMR'S to please explain his role in my early discharge.

Turn this into the Medical Center and R. O

No answer to New C&P.

Wait one year and receive a Denial - We place our weight with the psychiatrist as they are psychiatrist, you have a personality disorder.

Sorry that you feel that the C&P was erroneous, but good for rating.

Go to BVA Remanded to AMC

7. After the above development has been completed, the veteran's claims file should returned to the board of VA psychiatrists who participated in the April 2005 examination for clarification

of the provided opinion. They should be requested to review the record and reconcile their opinion as to etiology in light of the evidence added since their examination of the veteran, including the

May 2005 statement of Dr. B C.C and the January 2006 statement of Dr.M P .

Two Psychiatrist received my claims file October 6th 2006

Statement

C_ File Read

Read Letter of Dr.C

Read letter of Dr. P

No evidence to alter conclusion.

Signed Dr. B and DR. L.

I do not consider this following the remand.

How can anyone give weight to a report that does not reconcile etiology?

I have Va. Medical Doctor - More likely than not.

Military Treating Physician - clarifying his treatment of me for anxiety.

Doctor of 29 years - Anxiety origin began in service.

Military Doctors Letter to Va.

To whom it may concern:

_________ Formerly ---- , has requested that I write documenting my care of her during the period of

February and March, 1964, at the U.S ___ She was an enlisted person and I was a general Medical Officer, practicing at that facility. The question she has asked me to address is whether I helped her obtain a discharge from the Navy.

_____________ has provided from her medical records as well as recent letter to me, which is undated. My evaluation of her on 2/20/64 and a follow up visit on 2 / 27/ 64 are available. Two Psychiatric consultations are also available for review. The first performed on 3/12/64 by DR. J and the second performed by Dr. M. Finally the letter by our C.) recommends an Honorable Discharge by reason of unsuitability. My understanding is that the discharge occurred shortly thereafter.

After phone discussion with ____, I did remember her as an enlisted person at the ______ with whom I had worked on occasion. My workup of 2/20/64 concluded that she had tension versus vascular headaches and I added a tranquilizer to her headache medicine for anxiety. The note from 2/ 27/ 64 documents that the lab test were normal and I recognize my personal shorthand in my notes that I often used for a counseling session. After 40 years I do not remember whether I started the process discharge, but suspect I may have been supportive. She had seen a Navy Psychiatrist on 3/12/64 with no indication of further workup or return. Two weeks later she saw another psychiatrist to whom I frequently referred patients who needed special understanding and sensitivity. While there is no documentation that I referred her, the fact that she saw Dr. M scarcely two weeks after with no worsening of condition does suggest to me that I may have sent her for the evaluation relative to discharge.

Both C H and Dr. M comment on ----- immaturity and that she was uncooperative in her duties. After she reminded me and recalled specific instances. I did recall that she baby - sat in our home on multiple occasions with our two children ages 2 and 1. I know that my wife and I would have not allowed her to stay with the children if there had been any question of her suitability. The ___ staff was close knit and I would have likely been made aware of any poor behavior on ______ part.

While my memory does not allow me confident documentation of my role in her discharge there is circumstantial evidence that her story is credible and I hope that you will give her case every consideration..

BCC M.D.

What is next?

Josephine

Edited November 5, 2006 by Josephine

[Berta]

I agree with the suggestion that others have made-to get an independent medical opinion from a psychiatrist who can definitively state your present disability and it's nexus to your service.

A good psychiatrist, with the use of many psychiatric tests, can provide a medical rationale and test results that could overcome this whole rigamorale-

it seems the VA never did any tests at all-it would certainly provide more medical evidence in your behalf.

These psychological tests are very accurate as I understand, in determining proper diagnosis.

Once he/she -the IMO doctor -rules out PD, and diagnoses anxiety/depression-the only thing left is proof of the nexus-the link of the diagnosis to proven events during your service that would warrant a service connected rating.

I dont understand how they awarded a pension based on anxiety yet now say you have PD.

[Josephine]

I dont understand how they awarded a pension based on anxiety yet now say you have PD.

I have looked at that pension a dozen times and never thought of it that way.

They did didn't they.

I have it here in black and white.

Does anyone know how they did that? Is that what the BVA wants to know also?

Do you have any ideal of why the two psychiatrist did not comply to the remand?

Josephine

Edited November 5, 2006 by Josephine

[Berta]

"They should be requested to review the record and reconcile their opinion as to etiology"

This is what a clear nexus would provide.An etiology that could not be qquestioned.

What I think is one doc is saying- this disability is due to your service- the other one is saying it is not.

Etiology: cause or origin-

Proof of a strong nexus is an etiology that could resolve all of this-

Has the VA fully considered any proof you have offered of the causal event or circumstances that would lend one to have anxiety disorder?

I felt the BVA was looking for more information on the servicewoman who drowned.They did not mention anything else as I recall as a significant stressor.

This is certainly what would be for most people a stressor, an event unexpected and unusual enough to cause anxiety and stress.

EVen if the doctor's can reconcile their diagnosis and even agree on an anxiety disorder, the VA still needs proof of the actual stressor-the event that caused the anxiety disorder.

The BVA saw that this could be a proven stressor as the death of any service person -while in service- could be proven.I think this is why they mention this event in the remand.

Maybe I am looking at this wrong but I have had many PTSD vets who had to do considerable work to prove their stressor.

Even those in combat did not necessarily have the evidence on their DD 214 to fulfill the stressor requirement. I helped some vets do tracings from the travelling wall to support deaths of their buddies in Vietnam. Not only did they need some background info to find the names on the Wall but then they also had to make sure VA knew they served with this buddy in the same unit in an operation at same time of the buddy's death.Not all operations are combat. One vet's buddy died due to friendly fire explosion.A land mine he was stringing suddenly blew up.The vet had to prove he was in same unit- had the same MOS and had 2 other witness statements that this buddy death had occured.He used an obit from the hometown newspaper too.

I feel that regardless of the military circumstances -the stressor in your case might still need more proof.

PTSD is an anxiety disorder and in this way your claim would involve the same inservice linkage as a PTSD claim would.

Surely your private doctor might have documented this drowning event.

Edited November 5, 2006 by Berta

[Josephine]

"They should be requested to review the record and reconcile their opinion as to etiology"

This is what a clear nexus would provide.An etiology that could not be questioned.

What I think is one doc is saying- this disability is due to your service- the other one is saying it is not.

Etiology: cause or origin-

Dr. C. is giving them their origin.

"offered of the causal event or circumstances that would lend one to have anxiety disorder?"

Berta,

The day a doctor jerks me by the neck, until I wet all over myself is just not in vogue. I still see myself as the 19 year old standing 150 feet in the air and looking down into that 18' deep water and praying that I wouldn't die going down. This was not a one time thing. My hands are sweating so badly right now, thinking about it that I can hardly type.

I dream about that those darn steps all the time and I can't get anyone to wake me up. I knew to God that I was going to die in that pool. Perhaps you are an excellent swimmer and it wouldn't bother you, but it did me. I told the Neurologist that I drank so much water in those days, that I had had any water since. No, this doctor did not write it down, but he didn't think it was funny either.

I was so busy trying to stay alive myself, at that time, I didn't have much time to think about Doris.

I hope if she is alive, that they have contacted her, for she is most likely on disability from it all.

When you get down to it, What is the definition of Anxiety?

When the two psychiatrist made those statements, they didn't think that I could locate Dr. C.

I did.

Back in the 1960's to my knowledge, there was no such thing as PTSD.

There is a lot left out of that remand. As you remember the remand also says Roanoke, not true, my claims file was sent there from Huntington, W. Va.

I had one C&P out of Roanoke with the More Likely than Not. Transferred to Huntington for rating and then 5 months later, set up with those two quacks. They honestly are.

I refuse to post this on line as it is not legal for a C&P, but it did happen and I have the proof. I am not crazy, maybe the day with the two psychaitrist, I was.

There isn't much I remember about that day, for it was like a dream, but there is a lot that I do remember.

I started treatment for this illness in service, we are talking about 43 years of my life and 29 years with the same doctor.

He would have to be an idiot, if he didn't know me by now. Think about that. That is longer than a lot of the ones that post.

There is a lot left out of the remand, because so much of it is illegal.

The AMC is trying to get to the bottom of all of it.

I faxed them a letter stating the doubt law and to end it.

The two psychiatrist won't cooperate and I don't want another C&P to do what they need to do.

PTSD is an anxiety disorder and in this way your claim would involve the same inservice linkage as a PTSD claim would.

Berta,

I think that you need to check that out a little more. I do not come under PTSD.

Thanks,

Josephine

Edited November 5, 2006 by Josephine