ptsd Non-combat Ptsd

[Rick]

The local VA rep told me I can't file a claim for ptsd because I wasn't actually in combat. I was a hospital corpsman at the Naval Hosptial in DaNang. I had so many patients die I can't even remember some of them. But I remember many of them. Especially the kids. I have been diagnosed with ptsd at the VA hospital. I have only recently been able to keep from flying into rages when something sets me off. I've been in AA for 7 years now, so I don't combine rage and drunkenness anymore. But my life for over 30 years has been really screwed up by what I carry with me. When the rep told me I couldn't have ptsd I fled from the office so I wouldn't do anything really dumb. Now I'm afraid to go back there. I don't want to lose my control and I also don't want to be humiliated again. Especially by a civillian who's never had blood on her hands. Or her face. I stutter when I try to answer questions about what went down in Nam. I sound like an idiot. I hate it. Can I somehow submit a claim without having to grovel in the local office? Appreciate any advice. Thanks.

[Stretch]

This is the newer combat status of recent Combat Veterans.

VHA_Combat.pdf

[sixthscents]

I don't have CIB, Combat action ribbon, and I don't even have an MOS. With these requirements all Navy, Waves, Air Force, and Coast Guard did not participate in Combat, nor could they have possibly had or have PTSD.

Nope, I just won a case... well I and the veteran won a case where his stressor was an assault in a movie theater... yep movie theater BUT he was treated by the doc for concussion etc. and seen by a Navy psychiatrist (he was in the Navy) who diagnosed possible PTSD at the time, and this was 10 years before he retired.

We filed, and won a decent rating. So, you do not have to be in combat arms to have PTSD.. the T stands for Traumatic, so ANY traumatic event which occured in service that can be verified as well as some legitimate documentation and you are golden..................

That been my experience. OTSD claims fail most because people cant prove a stressor, or get a dianosis... well those are basic requirements and are reasonable - all things considered.

[Testvet]

I have given the VARO enough evidence to grant my cardiovascular claims, many times over, they have decided they are not going to grant any claims related to medical problems caused by the experiments at Edgewood Arsenal at the local level, I feel like a chinese menu just pick one, well now it's time for the BVA, I had hope when the VA in DC sent me a letter in September verifying the fact that I am one of the 7120 Air Force and Army veterans used at Edgewood between 1955 - 1975.

Nope another denial this time their reasoning was the 77 toxins in the water wells and soil could have gotten there after I left in 1974 and the time they were found in 1978 and the EPA ordered the water wells capped in 1978. The government has been dumping toxic material there from 1917 until 1978, they are still finding old barrels that work there way to the surface as late as 2 years ago on the base. It is the safest base in the nation as far as BRAC is concerned, they can never clean up all the toxic material.

I am sorry I don't believe the water I was drinking in 1974 was safe and pure, not after 50 years of dumping. 43 of the chemicals are linked to cardiovascular problems. What happened to benefit of the doubt?

[betrayed]

28 Years in service never seen combat, but as a Military Police and a reserve police officer which the navy gave me permission to do, I saw allot of traumatic crap. I have been diagnosed with PTSD by a few docs and most recentlly by a C&P. My stressors are verifiable and I beleive they have allready been verified. I am just waiting for the rating to come. My VSO said I would never wind a PTSD claim (IDIOT) so dont beleive combat is the only way you can get PTSD.

[Berta]

I respectfully disagree with Vike re: although his points are always profound-

it isn't even a disagreement- just a fact I cannot comprehend.

In 2006 there were 31,472 cases considered by the BVA. The word remand appears in 21,487 of them.

This could mean from past remand or for current remand-

and certainly the BVA probably decided some of these cases favorably at the BVA level. Many many of them are remands due to violation of the VCAA.

I have done a lot of work on my own POA's BVA cases to see what kind of remands they are getting-

all mainly due to the violations of the VCAA.That THEY could have advised the vet on right away.

I had to explain to them in a letter with evidence- to their main office-what the VCAA is and what a proper VCAA notification consists of.

I also had to explain to them what the regs are on evidence.

My IMO evidence problem-it is not a mailroom problem and it might not lie with the RO at all-Terry-

I should hear soon from Regional counsel on that- and also the results of the rating specialist who the claims are with.

I believe that the IMOs (2 in 2005) were NOT given to the DRO and that is when they disappeared and continued to disappear from the c file-

the vet rep in 2005 at that DRO conference told his boss the DRO had rejected them-so why would he want them there now-to show he lied to his boss?

My former local vet rep was determined to see my claims fail.I dont know why but

I showed his boss email he sent to to prove that his advise was wrong.He never kept copies of my claims and only right before that above conference occurred-with the rep in the VARO building did I realise that he screwed up and the vet rep at the RO had to cover for him.

The documented evidence however from VA itself (I dont go by what POAs say)consistently

says they never got them at all. From Mail room- (also some bypasssed mailroom and went directly to the VSM and director-) to the c file where there are many hands that can open it all up-not necessarily VA employees-

Since I had not been a claimant for many years after the VCAA I did not know what one was until Jangrin posted one here.The POA said it was a legal one- until I listed links to their VCAA Remands at the BVA.

I believe that even one remand due to a violation of the VCAA ( something the vet cannot control unless they work at the VA and prepare it themselves)-is one too many and the regs on the VCAA forbid denials without proper VCAA notification first.

This is an "error" per M21-1 a denial without proper VCAA notice- but one of many errors that fall under DTA-

so the vet's only recourse is to get a real VCAA letter right away-Prior to the denial or at least one that is specific as to what the veteran still needs to send them-

and the advocate or rep should insist on this.

VBM CHapter 16. full discussion of the VCAA.

Edited January 27, 2007 by Berta

[Vike17]

Berta,

So if you take the 21,487 cases that were remanded back to the VARO's and determine when each of the claims were filed (which year, because they all weren't filed in 2006), and then take that number of claims remanded for that year and compare it to the number of over all claims submitted in that time, it still represents a small percentage from the over all claims submitted within that time frame. This is even true if you were to take the claims that might have been wrong and the veteran never appealed them, or the claims that a DRO over turned in favor of the veteran. One could even throw in the claims that have been remanded numerous times into the numbers and it still would represent a small percentage of the over all claims.

One could even take this a step further. If one were to break this down according to each RO and even take the appeals numbers from the Appeals Teams at each office, it would show a small percentage of all the claims in that particular time period.

Does this make sense?

I certainly agree with you that if even one claim is denied with out the VCAA notive ect... being sent out, that's one two many, but it doesn't run rampant through the entire VA system as many veterans think.

Vike 17

Edited January 27, 2007 by Vike17