Would anyone be willing to look over my husbands new report and DBQs concerning separate ratings for TBI/PTSD A&A Headaches?

[Vet Dog and wife]

 

Would anyone be willing to look over my husband’s new report and DBQs concerning separate ratings for TBI/PTSD A&A Headaches? we also posted a lot of his VA claim docs too.

 

Thank you all very much for all your prior advice. you have helped my husband so much and we truly appreciate all your help.

Edited May 1, 2019 by Vet Dog and wife
need help

[Berta]

The 6th page, the rating sheet, is wrong. The diagnostic codes are wrong.

I will try to develop a CUE on it.

Is this the last rating sheet the VA ever prepared?

PTSD is diagnosed under 9411

TBI, (there was a big scandal on this years ago- all available here at hadit) is rated under 8045.

NVLSP advises that any veteran , rating under the older TBI regulations, should ask the 2008 regulations for TBI to be applied to their claim....

there is a lot to that here that I myself posted in 2008---

The new TBI rating schedule is in 38 CFR 4.124 (a) for DC 8045.

I amconcerned as to how the ITF claim was worded.

 

[Vet Dog and wife]

Hi Berta,

I think that was the last rating sheet. we provided my husband's complete Claims file, many VA medical record, and other medical reports and evidence to the Psychiatrist and psychologist for their report. they listed all the evidence they read, so I believe this is all there is.

 

Thanks again Berta

[Berta]

OK- I believe the headaches will fall under the new 2008 TBI criteria.

The whole regulation is here somewhere-I will try to find it.

Prior to the boxing trauma, did your husband have other PTSD stressors,that could have been confirmed as to happening prior to his boxing trauma?

Did the VA know of them?

How much time is left for you to support the IFT claim?

 

 

[Berta]

This is the 2008 DC 8045 rating criteria :

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/4.124a

Even though my husband's organic brain trauma  (stroke)was not classified as a TBI, the VA did rate him under the 8045 codes, as I recall- I will have to dig that out. they used 1992 to 1998 rating information.

"9304 Major or mild neurocognitive disorder due to traumatic brain injury"

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/4.130

DC 9304 says Nothing about PTSD, or Mood disorder.

The rating sheet contains  at least 2 distinct legal errors (CUE)

Does the ITF claim you filed state a higher rating for the PTSD under 9411 in lieu of no rating in the 1999 rating decision?

Or does it request a proper rating for his PTSD?

sorry for all the questions and I might not be able to do more with this today- but I am sure others here will help.........................

 

 

 

[Vet Dog and wife]

On 3/27/2019 at 4:58 PM, Berta said:

OK- I believe the headaches will fall under the new 2008 TBI criteria.

The whole regulation is here somewhere-I will try to find it.

Prior to the boxing trauma, did your husband have other PTSD stressors,that could have been confirmed as to happening prior to his boxing trauma?

Did the VA know of them?

How much time is left for you to support the IFT claim?

 

 

 

Edited May 1, 2019 by Vet Dog and wife

[Berta]

I found the pick Ax situation in the 4-22-80 rating as "0" -

however what I am looking for is documentation of the first time he ever claimed PTSD, which seems to be the 7-29-98 claim ( re open) that generated the rating sheet ( page 6) dated 11/08/1999 that says 9304 Dementia due to head trauma with mood disorder and post Traumatic Stress Disorder.( claimed as neurological and psychological damage due to boxing)100% from 7-29-98- the date of that claim.

I guess I cannot seek a better EED on the PTSD issue, prior to 1998.

Still this rating sheet is all wrong.

This case shows how the VA should separate TBI from PTSD (in most if not all cases- my firm opinion based on VA case law):

https://www.va.gov/vetapp18/files11/18147332.txt

The veteran's PTSD was restored to 50% and his TBI was increased to 70% which, on remand I would think would trigger a TDIU decision.

I have read better decisions than this and will try to find some-

This is a key point of the above decision however:

In the September 2017 appellate brief, the Veteran requested a 70 percent rating from the March 2009 VA examination forward.  The Veteran reasoned that applying the new DC 8045 criteria to the symptoms reported in the March 2009 examination would allow for a 70 percent disability rating.  After a careful review of the evidence, the Board agrees with the Veteran’s assertion and finds that an increased rating of 70 percent is warranted during this entire period.  The pertinent evidence includes March 2009 examination report and the Veteran’s consistent reports of chronic symptoms, especially relating to impaired memory and cognition.  
The October 2008 date is appIn the September 2017 appellate brief, the Veteran requested a 70 percent rating from the March 2009 VA examination forward.  The Veteran reasoned that applying the new DC 8045 criteria to the symptoms reported in the March 2009 examination would allow for a 70 percent disability rating.  After a careful review of the evidence, the Board agrees with the Veteran’s assertion and finds that an increased rating of 70 percent is warranted during this entire period.  The pertinent evidence includes March 2009 examination report and the Veteran’s consistent reports of chronic symptoms, especially relating to impaired memory and cognition.  
The October 2008 date is appropriate for the increased rating because the law allows for compensation from when the symptoms occurred, rather than from the date of an examination documenting the worsening.  See Swain v. McDonald, 27 Vet. App. 219 (2015) (holding that the effective date for an increased rating is based on when it is factually ascertainable that the disability worsened and not on the date of the examination that documented the worsening).    
ropriate for the increased rating because the law allows for compensation from when the symptoms occurred, rather than from the date of an examination documenting the worsening.  See Swain v. McDonald, 27 Vet. App. 219 (2015) (holding that the effective date for an increased rating is based on when it is factually ascertainable that the disability worsened and not on the date of the examination that documented the worsening).    

"In the September 2017 appellate brief, the Veteran requested a 70 percent rating from the March 2009 VA examination forward.  The Veteran reasoned that applying the new DC 8045 criteria to the symptoms reported in the March 2009 examination would allow for a 70 percent disability rating.  After a careful review of the evidence, the Board agrees with the Veteran’s assertion and finds that an increased rating of 70 percent is warranted during this entire period.  The pertinent evidence includes March 2009 examination report and the Veteran’s consistent reports of chronic symptoms, especially relating to impaired memory and cognition.  
The October 2008 date is appropriate for the increased rating because the law allows for compensation from when the symptoms occurred, rather than from the date of an examination documenting the worsening.  See Swain v. McDonald, 27 Vet. App. 219 (2015) (holding that the effective date for an increased rating is based on when it is factually ascertainable that the disability worsened and not on the date of the examination that documented the worsening).  "   easier to read than the first excerpt)  

This is important to a proper TBI rating and EED under potential CUE regarding the TBI to your claim- But---

My husband had multi-infarct dementia. ...thus a 100% P & T rating was proper.One of my CUEs is on the Permanent part , as I mentioned.

Has the VA, in your husband's medical records, ever ruled in or ruled out multi-infarct dementia????

What the means is this- my husband presented at many ER trips due to dizzy spells, and blurred vision, that were impacting on his work while employed by the VA.The dizzy spells I proved ( and the autopsy supported this,) were  numerous trascient ischemic attacks, what they call mini strokes-that can be caused by multiple types of brain trauma. I often wonder how many football players who had TBIs from blows to the head, in fact also had multiple ischemic infarcts.

Their presense would be revealed (ruled in) or ruled out ,by any MRIs the VA did on his brain.In the older days- my husband's MRI results ( 1992) were handwritten, hard to decifer, and also there was a briefer typed rendition.

There could be a CT scan rendition as well. But a CT scan is not as definitive as an MRI.

This info appears after many medical entries on multi farct dementia:

from https://www.onhealth.com/content/1/dementia_memory_brain_disorder

while it does not state multi infarct is present or connected to this-it certainly shows that Dementia (which VA cannot cure_ as in my husband's case he had dementia too) and the fact that your husband was declared incmpetent for VA claims urposes tells me that the TBI rating should be at 100%, to include the headaches,standing alone from any PTSD rating they would give.

Did he ever receive Social Security Disability solely for the TBI, or dementia, or PTSD, or Mood disorder?

"Boxer's syndrome, or dementia pugilistica, is a form of chronic brain injury that occurs in many athletes (particularly boxers) who experience constant blows to the head.

 

Dementia Pugilistica Causes

Dementia pugilistica is caused by repetitive head trauma. Its name comes from symptoms experienced by boxers who have had years of being punched in the head."