NOD for deceased husbands claims

[Poopsy Woopsy]

i am in an NOD for TDIU  thus asking accrued thru PTSD. The more work I do the more I find out the more I should have done or I guess my VSO. As in earlier posts, I have said that the only reason they denied the TDIU (which to me was obvious), is they denied it because of an old SSI claim for his back. I will "state" in my NOD that it should not supersede the TDIU/PTSD because I can add some presumptive info that started "Before" the back claim.. (I don't know if it will be as determinative to them, as PTSD can be elusive) Again I'm not sure thats what they even want. It seems they just want me to put in "Words" that it is not predicated on the back situation, which by the way back issues are in his VA med records as a condition as well, but I found where VA stated the back was stable. In doing all this (thru good info like you get here) I realized my husband should have been 100% for DMII. He met all the requirements for 100%. DMII it was originally claimed thru A.0. (along w CHF, ED, PN,) which I hope the new ruling as of Feb will change that. (we could not prove in country  because he was on ship, (did what you said Berta, got records asking for info stating ship etc, but they stated because of PII, I wouldn't receive such info. I do have his ship listed on the presumptive list so it all seems obvious. Do "I" have to Resubmit or do they just re-rule on the claim.  ANYWAY, back to my original point! Can and "Should" I add evidence stating proof he fits the 100% criteria for DMII. and ask for Re-consideration of DMII on presumptive or secondary grounds on the NOD??. (Or do I have the right to, (or shoud I)  resubmit it seperately, even though it was previously part of a closed claim) The AO is closed because of "No further proof" but should I not be able to re-direct his DMII on the NOD as a secondary to his PTSD instead? or even presumptive because of so much medical evidence in his VA med files. I am so determined to make them pay for what he "deserves" but I get lost with emotion, and then get lost with where I should go with all the information. What I don't understand is there is a huge amount of medical files all positive for everything claimed, so don't they have a "Duty to assist"  in getting it and figuring it out?  "Some" of the medical evidence but not much in respect to how much evidence there is, is in his C-files, so "is it" really as easy as sending "more" medical evidence that sits their right in his medical files for them to see?     I read where Berta stated not to re-state things that are obvious, so as not to assume "Ignorance" on their part or that they are not doing their job. (I realize they are just "Pawns" in the game) so some more direction would be very helpful to me. Been away for a bit because it takes such consentration with so much information,  realizing the more I find out the more work I have to do.   SOOOO afraid of making a mistake.  AND NO!!! I am too committed to this to hand it over to someone else at this point.. Except for asking verification from my VSO.

P.S. got a new printer so I could send receive or copy info now to help with any info received or replied to. Thanks everyone.. You are what grounds me!!    

[Poopsy Woopsy]

Hi guys

Berta Cant you distinguish a stressor from the "worsening of PTSD?

that is what they are asking for. I had to show the worsening of his related claim.. Has the PTSD worsened thus getting TDIU?

The first paper states the denial and the second states that the claim for  individual unemployability is "RE-OPENED! and yes my husband was 70% for PTSD. It makes sense that you wouldn't want to re-hash stressors. but like I said the stressors related to him getting PTSD would be different from the (after his military time where the original stressers were from) stressors that I would talk about now for aggrivation of secondary conditions and ultimately  TDIU. I now don't know if all my work should even be submitted. They really just want me to state that SSI is not the reason for his disability.. Go figure!! he is already disabled with 70% PTSD any help would be appreciated ... lost for sure now!!

 

a   

Edited February 24, 2019 by Poopsy Woopsy

[Berta]

“Berta Cant you distinguish a stressor from the "worsening of PTSD?

that is what they are asking for. I had to show the worsening of his related claim.. Has the PTSD worsened thus getting TDIU?”

I had to prove a worsening of my husband's 30% SC for PTSD after he died- because he had filed a claim on that basis, in his lifetime.

Unfortunately I agree with the VA's denial of TDIU.

However since they mentioned his treatment records fromSpkane VA from Feb.16, 1999 to May 12, 2014-it is always possible that they missed evidence of -if not TDIU- evidence to support a 100% rating for the PTSD.

I had clear evidence of a higher level of my husband's PTSD ,which included a SSDI award, but even without that award, the medical evidence from his VA psychologist and his 2 hospitalizations at VA for PTSD, were proof that the 30% was far too low.

 

It appears the veteran was not P & T in his lifetime, a condition for DIC, unless the veteran died of a direct SC death- but you said it was due to malpractice. Section 1151 death DIC awards do not support CHAMPVA or DEA eligibility.

 

Your past post stated::

I was awarded DIC, as it was an easy case having a letter from an outside cardiologist stating the reason he died was neglect on the VA's part. "

I asked :

So was this a formal Section 1151 DIC award?

So I am asking again- because if this was a direct SC death , due to a cardio disability or a Diabetes Mellitus disability- it could help change the aspect of this whole claim.

Did any rating sheet the VA sent have anything added to it in addition to the PTSD?

If he was a VA patient for 15 years, as I understand the evidence list, surely they had diagnosed and rated the heart disease and Diabetes.

 

The reason I ask these questions is because,. After over 20 years of research I have done on VA malpractice, and multiple contacts with the House VAC and OGC, VA Secretarys, GAO, etc etc......there iis finally a Bill in Congress which is 75 % or more of what I asked for. The bill can save lives.

It is missing one specific area that should be of great concern to the Senators who have sponsored the bill- and I am preparing info for them on that issue.

In a past post you made it seemed the VA gave you two ways to go on the award.

Either the award was under Section 1151 DIC ( which  holds no legal provisions for CHAMPVA and DEA)

 

“. but like I said the stressors related to him getting PTSD would be different from the (after his military time where the original stressers were from) stressors that I would talk about now for aggrivation of secondary conditions and ultimately  TDIU.”

I do not know how the VA would consider non military stressors as aggravating an establiished 70% award.

I am hoping others here will chime in on that. I am glad you could scan and attach the denial but I am more confused than ever on a few aspects of all this.

or, (one of my greatest fears) they granted direct SC DIC with no medical basis at all to avoid another Section 1151 wrongful death award.

The VA knows I have been breathing down their necks for years on the ways they hide their malpractice statistics, and maybe they have found a new way of handling them.

 

I do not mean a survivor would not be entitled to DIC under whatever laws they grant it under-

I have 4 DIC awards in all. 2 for Direct SC death and two for 1151 death.

But one of your last posts alarmed me- knowing what I know about the VA and how they manipulate malpractice statistics.

The Bill S 221, if passed, will save lives.It needs more work however, but it is the FIRST time, in the over 2 decades I have been involved in investigating this issue, that Something is finally being done.

VA medical professionals who have committed malpractice in the past have gotten away with it and either held their jobs with no repercussions, or , in my husband's case, they moved to different VAMCS.

The Senate committee knows this and finally something will (MUST) be done.

To get back to the ao SHIP's List::

 

In the recent change at VA web site to the AO Ship's List they have an excellent pdf:

 

https://www.va.gov/shiplist-agent-orange.pdf

It holds this info:

 

Ship Categories

The list contains five categories of ships that operated on the waters of Vietnam. A Ship is placed on this list when documentary evidence shows that it fits into a particular category. The required evidence can come from an official ship history, deck logs, cruise books, Captain’s letters, or similar documents. A specific ship may be listed in more than one category, based on its activities. Evidence requirements for the presumption of Agent Orange exposure may vary depending on what dates the Veteran was aboard and what ship activity occurred on those dates."

 

And states the categories- but there is a key wording above to the pdf:

 

Evidence requirements for the presumption of Agent Orange exposure may vary depending on what dates the Veteran was aboard and what ship activity occurred on those dates. In other words ,proving a vet was on a ship on this list, would also have to comply with the date(s)dates ) of their actual AO exposure."

For example , as the list states:

 

USS Vancouver (LPD-9) docked to pier at Da Nang on June 19, 1971 (see other category)

and is stated again here:

*USS Vancouver (LPD-2) [Amphibious Transport Dock] while anchored offshore, conducted numerous amphibious troop beach landings with smaller “mike boats” in the areas of Da Nang, Cam Ranh Bay, Cua Viet River, and Mekong River Delta from February 1965 to September 1971 (see other category)

 

 

 

 

USS Tripoli (LPH-10) [Landing Platform Helicopter] sent crew members ashore for beach party at Da Nang on July 29, 1967 (see other category)

and

*USS Tripoli (LPH-10) operated as troop transport with helicopters and smaller vessels transporting troops on and off shore intermittently from May 1967 to December 1973 (see other category)

 

Perhaps this was when your husband was sent by Helo to Vietnam for a secret mission.

 

He served ,per the decision, in USMC from 3-28-1968 to Nov 6,1970-so it appears he fits into two of these categories, I put a * next to.

 

Since it certainly appears he might have been exposed to AO, by virtue of being on these ships,

the only other proof you would need is that he had at least one, if not two AO presumptive disabilities.

 

Either he had Ischemic heart disease or he had Diabetes Mellitus, with PN.

 

I proved my husband had both...but they were never diagnosed or treated by the VA.It was a lot of work on my part to do that.

 

My final question is do you have medical documentation and diagnosis of these diabilities in his VA medical records ( or in any private medical records)

and,

do you have NSC ratings with these disabilities listed on any past rating sheet...in the event the past Nehmer Court orders could apply to you under Footnote One Nehmer?

 

 

I am sorry for this long post- this is one of the most confusing claims I have ever seen.

 

Personally I dont foresee a TDIU award at all- I see the possibility of retroactive AO awards for DMII, and perhaps for IHD, if that was his diagnosis for heart disease, or perhaps the heart disease and PN were secondary to the DMII....if an AO claim is filed.

 

I also foresee that the Procopio decision might even be in affect before they make a decision on a new claim for AOs.

 

With proof he was onboard the USS Tripoli and the Vancouver, on the dates or within the date frame they give above, and with documented medical proof of the AO presumptives you mentioned, they might make a favorable decision prior to the next Nehmer- if there even will be a new Nehmer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Berta]

sorry high winds is messing up my PC access-

this part did not paste right:

"Either the award was under Section 1151 DIC ( witch holds no legal provisions for CHAMPVA and DEA)

or, (one of my greatest fears) they granted direct SC DIC with no medical basis at all to avoid another Section 1151 wrongful death award."

Hopefully others will chime in.  We need more info. Can you scan and attach the DIC award and any rating sheet that shows all of his disabilities to include the SC PTSD and any other SC and any NSC disabilities with ratings?

When a NSC rating becomes a SC rating, (for same disability, ) it provides a good basis for a valid CUE if the NSC rating is at least 10%.

[Berta]

I found the answer in an older post-to the DIC question-YES it was a direct SC death!

"They stated "Service connection for cause of death on the claim of PTSD because I had a Cardiologist state the connection between the above heart issues and PTSD. The same  letter that verified his death was caused by the neglect of the VA. So awarding DIC.  Thus deeming PTSD as a cause of death also!"

That is a very unusual DIC award.

If the VA denied the AO claims, is it possible they never even looked at the VA AO ship's list?

Can you scan and attach ( cover C file, name, address,) any denial you received for AO) that also shows the date of the denial?

The AO Ships list has grown a lot over the years because veterans were able to prove their ship was exposed to AO.

It is possible- if the VA was aware of what ships he served on, and stated he was not found to have been on any AO ship on the list-that their denial came prior to a more recent list, showing those ships.

If they denied, for AO, did you file a NOD in time on that claim?

If not the info from the Ships list and proof he has AO disabilities and served within the criteria listed by date for each ship-you would have good evidence to re open the AO claim.

I am sorry I do agree with the VA's denial of TDIU, unless medical evidence in his psychiatric records could somehow prove it should have been a 100% rating.

VA completely ignored my husband's TDIU form. But they awarded 100% SC for his SC PTSD. 

I feel the best chance you have now is with the AO ship's list.

 

[Poopsy Woopsy]

I am sory if I am not clear: will state some obvious

my husband was 70% for PTSD his death certificate was causative for CHF, COPD, PF, Coronary Artery disease. All non VA. 

They granted DIC and said: WE have determined that you are entitled to both DIC and death pension. They opted to give me DIC with getting ChampVA. Service connection for cause of death is granted. (does this mean that everthing on the death certificate is now SC?.    they looked at cardiologists statement that stated:   It is my opinion that his cause of death likely was due to a ventricular arrhythmic event leading to a sudden cardiac death (He states would have been prevented with a defibrillator AS RECOMMENDED) Now heres where it gets good.. he also states: more likely  than not his PTSD also had a marked deleterious effect on his heart and was a contributing factor to this vet's death I would consider his ptsd as causative in his death as well.!!!!   Then I find this letter:: to the dept of veterans affairs: (Skipped some parts)  it is my opinion that Mr. Hudgeons is totally and permanently disabled due to the conditions discussed below and that they are related to his military service.  Evidence of his medical diagnosis is: Interstitial PF.    specifically pages A,B, C, D. ( I don't know what that means and dont seem to have those pgs.) He then mentions I have reviewed his history on board the ships and is also my opinion "more likely than not"  PF was caused by exposure to AO including causation of secondary conditions of IHD, DMII, PN, aggrivated by said primary condition..    Problem being it is not physically signed just typed; Signed; Dr. Hescamp. Really wondering if He wrote it or not..  Isnt TDIU almost a given with 70% PTSD if there is obvious stressors? and what about the Cardiologist's letter stating PTSD was also a cause in his death.. Doesn't that cinch everything?  his medical records also state a Chronic mood disorder!! what am I missing here??? This is why I keep saying it seems cut and dried, I do take into consideration it is the VA and nothing is for sure!!  I also have mounds of medical papers from the VA about all his ER visits, Hospital stays, 49 meds, and trips to the VA which are in the high double digits. If that has all been pre-determined including his DMII. and I have said he fits category for 100% DMII, shouldnt that in and of itself be Enough?? He should have gotten a rating for DMII as well, not to mention all the medical secondary effects it has, that have been stated in records time and time again.  Sweet Jesus, I'm tired..  

Edited February 25, 2019 by Poopsy Woopsy

[Poopsy Woopsy]

Good morning Berta and guys! 

Here are a couple more answers to questions you asked Berta.. 

(please forgive me if I make things confusing, Just know I "REALLY" appreciate your help!)

Anyway! You asked If Vet had any NSC ratings.. "NO". thats where I get confused Why was he not rated for all he was being seen for at the VA!! (or was he and I just didn't know, don't they tell you? ) I did read in some of his medical files where they state information pertaining to the vet  and they mention in the notes about his prior Heart issues and said they were NSC.  does that mean he was rated then?  just because someone stated it somewhere in med records? So i assume heart and Diabetes were never rated other than what i just mentioned  but it was also stated in the Dr.s note for cause of death that got him  DIC. It was:  cause of death "sudden cardiac death" but it also stated: his PTSD also had an affect on his heart and causative in his death as well. So he's stating 2 causes! Everthing ties together.. stressors on the heart and DMII with worsening of PTSD all should be enough for TDIU.       I didn't know it was possible to get more than one DIC.. So should he have gotten another DIC then for heart etc.. all I suppose too late for any such thing. 

One other question! I read something from a lawyer that stated you should give any and all pertinent information on your NOD (like me mentioning stating Secondary stuff that is all connected to his PTSD and his death  and also the DMII which he should have been rated 100% SC or NSC either way. it was significant and should have been a rating! Is it because somehow while taking care of all his medical needs I should have been aware that I needed to file a ratings paper for all this stuff. thats when I wonder should not his Dr.s been somehow helping me in this?

Edited March 1, 2019 by Poopsy Woopsy