Title 18. Crimes And Criminal Procedure

[Josephine]

Hi,

Does anyone know does this regulation apply to doctors that perform C&P examinations or just to the Veteran?

TITLE 18. CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

PART 1. CRIMES

CHAPTER 47 FRAUD AND FALSE STATEMENTS

18 USCS SEC. 1001

Sec. 1001. Statements or entries generally

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully

(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by the trick, scheme, or device a material fact;

(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or

(3) makes or uses any false writings or document knowing the same to contain any materially

false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry;

Shall be fine under this title or imprisoned no more than 5 years, or both.

I need to know if I can quote this regulation to the AMC and the BVA concerning the changing of my military and private medical records?

Thanks so much,

Josephine

[Josephine]

jangrin,

I have taken the complete examination and brought out ever lie that she typed. I have drawn a map for the AMC and the BVA to see the lies against the truth of my military and private medical files. Now, she needs to prove the babies, the self inflicted injury, eating disorder, drug addict and the list goes on.

My physician of 29 years has written a letter to the BVA that she is patently incorrect in her facts.

This is what the remand states:

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. Bxxxx C.Cxxxxxx and the January 2006 statement of Dr.Mxxxxxx Pxxxx.

The AMC has sent the claims file back to the two psychiatrist and they will not comply with the remand.

Dr. B the male psychiatrist still will not sign the examination.

This is all they wrote to the AMC -

Dr. C. letter read

Dr. P letter read

No evidence to alter conclusion.

signed Dr. B.

Signed Dr. L

The two psychiatrist gave me an Axis 1 - Chronic anxiety disorder not otherwise specific

Axis 2- Borderline personality disorder

Axis 5 - GAF - 40

It appears that she did not develop a psychiatric disorder in service.

Do you have any ideal of what is next? My file was at the rater and now it is back at development.

Thanks,

Josephine

Edited November 25, 2006 by Josephine

[Guest jangrin]

Josephine,

Those two doctors (and I use the term lightly) are not going to do anyhting that will incriminate themselves.

If you have infact done everything you can, to discredit them, and have indeed filed letters and reports from various sources. If you believe you have done everything you can do, then you need to take a breath, gets some rest, and let the claim work through the system.

The one thing that I am learning is, it ain't gonna go any faster than what is is gonna go. The system stinks and is slow. Bur I do know that if the C&P doctors refuse to address what the BVA is requesting then it will be returned and documented that they refused to comply with the request.

I would think their noncompliance will discredit their opinion and you should prevail. How to get the file back to the BVA from being remanded I'm not sure. Maybe someone here has some ideas. Maybe the SO or POA can get it back to where it needs to be for rating.

If you have done all you can do - then unfortunately now all you can do is wait. As much as you would like to hurt them the way you have been hurt, the system is not set up that way. I can totally relate to how you feel. Especially when it seems alot of people have control over your life, some of which prove to be untrustworthy.

Still hoping for you to win this- Good Luck,

Jangrin

Edited November 25, 2006 by jangrin

[Guest jangrin]

Josephine, you said,

Dr. B the male psychiatrist still will not sign the examination.

This is all they wrote to the AMC -

Dr. C. letter read

Dr. P letter read

No evidence to alter conclusion.

signed Dr. B.

Signed Dr. L

This is complying with the request. They have signed a paper that states that their opinions have not changed and that the new evidense is not sufficient to change their minds. Therefore they state there is,

"No Evidence to alter conclusion".

That is their response to the new evidence. They are saying the new evidense is not sufficient to alter or change their minds or conclusions.

SOOOOO..... this being the case, the file should return to the BVA for rating. It doesn't get any more plan than "No evidense to alter conclusion". Basicly they are copping out. By doing this they do not have to explain their rational for thier exam statements. There C&P exam will carry only the weight the BVA gives it. And in comparison to the evidense you say you have provided, you and your evidense should prevail, especially with the written evidense from your current and past physicians backing you and not the C&P docs.

Jangrin

Edited November 25, 2006 by jangrin

[Josephine]

Jangrin,

Sorry it posted twiced.

Josephine

Edited November 26, 2006 by Josephine

[Josephine]

Jangrin,

That is exactly what I thought. There is no need for the AMC to send the C&P back to them again. They refuse to say when or how the anxiety began. It is as simple as that.

I have ask the AMC to place the doubt law into effect.

I have Dr. P - result of service - doctor of 29 years

Dr. Mxxxxx PhD Phychologist Va. Medical center - C&P Eximination - More likely than not the veterans anxiety and depression began or a result of her time in service.

Dr. C my military treating physician - statement that he did indeed give me the librium for my nerves and the caffergot for headaches and referred me to the two psychiatrist.

Not as the two psychaitrist stated the librium and caffergot were given for a headache prescribed by Dr. Cxxxxx.

I have supplied the AMC with a Buddy letter and about 20 other letters and these 3 doctors.

The application of, "as likely as not" itself is not speculation. The " as likely as not" standard equates to the statutory standard of the " approximate balance of positive and negative evidence", accepted by VA. to grant service connection. See 38 U.S.C.A. & 5107C.F. R. & 3.102.43.

The preponderance of the evidence supports granting the benefits sought on appeal. At the very least, an approximate balance of a claim, is present to cause a reasonable doubt to exist. Therefore, I point to 38 C.F.R. & 3.102 which provides that when a reasonable doubt exist " regarding service origin, the degree of disability, or any other point, such doubt will be resolved in favor of the claimant.”

Thanks,

Josephine