Depression decisions — 2013

The Board has determined that the Veteran's schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, with depression was incurred during a period of ACDUTRA and granted service connection.

The Veteran's service-connected acquired psychiatric disorder, including PTSD and depressive disorder, has been rated at 50 percent since the initial grant of service connection. The evidence shows that his condition causes significant impairment in social and occupational functioning.

The Board has granted service connection for PTSD and increased ratings for headaches and bronchitis. The appellant's diagnoses of PTSD and major depressive disorder have been recognized, leading to the grant of service connection.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for a videoconference hearing.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD and major depression with mood-incongruent psychotic features was denied in March 1999 due to lack of medical evidence. The effective date for the grant of service connection is now set at March 2, 1998, based on his informal claim received that day.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for a new VA audiology examination and review of post-service medical records. The issue of service connection for bilateral hearing loss remains on appeal.

The Board has determined that the appellant's discharge from his period of service was not under dishonorable conditions, thus allowing him to receive VA benefits.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, including PTSD, is denied. The Board found that the preponderance of evidence did not support a finding that any diagnosed psychiatric disorders were related to his military service.

The Veteran has withdrawn his appeal regarding the claim for entitlement to service connection for a respiratory disorder. The remaining claims have been adjudicated and are addressed in the REMAND portion of this decision.

The Veteran's claim for an initial evaluation in excess of 30 percent for his service-connected acquired psychiatric disorder, including PTSD, dysthymia with anxiety features, and depressive disorder, is being remanded due to the need for additional development and readjudication under both old and revised rating criteria.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for PTSD, bipolar disorder, and major depressive disorder are being remanded due to the need for additional development of his medical records.

The Veteran's PTSD with depressive disorder is rated at 70 percent effective July 30, 2009.

The Veteran's PTSD with associated depression was rated at 50 percent from July 16, 2008 to September 2, 2011. Effective September 3, 2011, the rating was increased to 70 percent.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's acquired psychiatric disorder, including major depressive disorder and PTSD, warrants a 100% rating due to total occupational and social impairment.

The Board has remanded the case for further evidentiary development, including obtaining additional treatment records and scheduling a VA psychiatric examination.

The Board found that there was no clear and unmistakable evidence to support the Veteran's claim of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, as his pre-existing condition worsened during service but did not originate in service.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, including depressive disorder and mood disorder, is being remanded due to the need for additional development of her medical records and a VA examination.

The Board found that the Veteran's claimed acquired psychiatric disorder, including PTSD, did not meet the criteria for service connection due to lack of credible evidence supporting a diagnosis and no in-service stressor verified.

The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, including PTSD and major depressive disorder, based on direct evidence of a link to service.

The Veteran's appeal has been dismissed due to his death, and the Board does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of the claims at this time.