ptsd Diagnosed housebound in 2008 by VA; is med diagnosis binding?

[Cannabis]

Hi everyone!

I started going to VA in 2008. I just discovered in my medical file that psychiatrist resident, as well as the head psychiatrist approved her diagnosis that I am housebound. That's 2 doctors. Then, over the next 2 years or so, many details in med record support housebound.

Sep 09, filed disability. 50% granted. (ptsd, depression, cannabis dependence)

Approx. May 2015, filed for increase. 100% granted, same as above.

I filed NOD.

My question regards this newly discovered evidence of record that shows since 2008, i was diagnosed housebound.  I also have current evidence of housebound, it's no mystery around here that I don't go anywhere. And haven't for years.

Is the disability examiner bound by this diagnosis in 2008?  If so, then

1. if I am housebound per physician diagnosis in VA medical notes, then how can I be 50%? Wouldn't that defacto be 100%

2. any ideas on approach for this?  NOD with SMC S claim to date back to Sep 09?  Or CUE?  Help!?

Thank you and bless.

 

Edited March 26, 2017 by Cannabis

[Buck52]

Roger that ,

I meant it was in your records in 2009 about what the Dr mention about being H.B, In fact  but they failed to read it in the actual decision, had they read it  you should have been referred to IU and SMC H.B.  Under SMC Special Circumstances  because your not able to leave home for work  and the SMC would be a more severe physical /mental disability..

Remember SMC is not a claim, .they give the SMC on the severity  physical/mentalpart of the disability ...and that Dr that mention you were House Bound in fact  means that your disability is server enough for SMC.....>.Again  ''under Special Circumstances''

Edited March 27, 2017 by Buck52

[pwrslm]

If it exists, the CUE for your case would exist here:

 

38 CFR § 4.2 Interpretation of examination reports.

Different examiners, at different times, will not describe the same disability in the same language. Features of the disability which must have persisted unchanged may be overlooked or a change for the better or worse may not be accurately appreciated or described. It is the responsibility of the rating specialist to interpret reports of examination in the light of the whole recorded history, reconciling the various reports into a consistent picture so that the current rating may accurately reflect the elements of disability present. Each disability must be considered from the point of view of the veteran working or seeking work. If a diagnosis is not supported by the findings on the examination report or if the report does not contain sufficient detail, it is incumbent upon the rating board to return the report as inadequate for evaluation purposes.

 

38CFR § 4.6 Evaluation of evidence.

The element of the weight to be accorded the character of the veteran's service is but one factor entering into the considerations of the rating boards in arriving at determinations of the evaluation of disability. Every element in any way affecting the probative value to be assigned to the evidence in each individual claim must be thoroughly and conscientiously studied by each member of the rating board in the light of the established policies of the Department of Veterans Affairs to the end that decisions will be equitable and just as contemplated by the requirements of the law.

 

If they ignored existing medical records and instead relied on a C&P examination, then you may have grounds for a CUE. Check the dates to insure that the medical opinions were not overlapping the decision. If there was no excuse for them to not have had the cited records in their hands, then I would move forward with CUE.
 

More info on CUE here:  https://asknod.org/2014/05/02/cue-the-quintessential-elements/

 

[FormerMember]

The basic answer is this. A psychiatrist works for VHA. Unless he is performing a c&p exam, his notes are not binding on a VA examiner who works for VBA. Having a 50% rating in 2009 when the notes were entered would have no preclusive effect on a rating less than 100% or IU. As for CUE, that is a horse of a different color. Absent your c-file, I would be loathe to venture a guess.