Depression Board decisions

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for a psychiatric disorder, defined as dysthymia and major depression.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim for service connection for major depression with anxiety and remanded the other issues to allow for further development.

The Board has determined that additional evidence is necessary to adjudicate the claim, and a remand is required in this case.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have a currently diagnosed bilateral leg disorder, and thus service connection for this condition is denied. The remaining claims of service connection for right shoulder, left shoulder, stomach/gastrointestinal, and depression disorders are pending evaluation.

The veteran's depression is granted as secondary to his service-connected lumbosacral spine disability. The issue of a total rating based on individual unemployability due to service connected disabilities will be remanded.

The veteran was granted a TDIU rating with a 70% disability rating for PTSD, dysthymic disorder, and history of major depressive disorder. The effective date is set to December 17, 2000.

The Board found that the veteran's claimed PTSD and major depression were not incurred in or aggravated during her military service, as there was no credible evidence supporting the occurrence of the claimed stressors.

The Board has ordered further development in the veteran's case due to incomplete records. The appeal is currently remanded for additional development of medical records.

The Board has ordered further development due to pending issues regarding the veteran's increased rating for fibromyalgia with major depressive disorder.

The veteran's case is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining VA treatment records and a psychiatric examination to determine the manifestations of her service-connected major depressive disorder.

The veteran's erectile dysfunction, resulting from both service-connected PTSD and non-service-connected causes, qualifies for special monthly compensation (SMC) for loss of use of a creative organ.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the claim for service connection for PTSD. The veteran's testimony regarding stressors during his service in Vietnam supports a finding of PTSD.

The Board has determined that the veteran's current hepatitis C, depressive disorder, and headaches are not attributable to his active military service.

The Board has reopened the claim for service connection for Peyronie's disease due to new evidence. The claim for service connection for a depressive disorder is denied as there is no evidence of a chronic psychiatric disability related to service or service-connected conditions.

The Board denied an increased evaluation for incontinence, status post total colectomy and ileostomy with subsequent ileostomy takedown and ileoanal anastomosis, currently evaluated as 60 percent disabling. The claim of entitlement to an increased evaluation for major depression was not addressed.

The Board has granted service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, including post-traumatic stress disorder and depression. The claim was reopened based on the submission of new and material evidence.

The Board denied service connection for the claimed conditions, including heart disorder, stomach disorder (including ulcers), gallbladder disorder, depression, and headaches. The decision is based on a finding that these conditions are not related to military service.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for atopic dermatitis, asthma, cataracts, and depression. The Board found that there was no evidence of a pre-existing condition in service or any aggravation during service. The current conditions were not shown to be related to service.

The Board has ordered further development in the veteran's case due to pending requests for additional evidence. The appeal is being remanded for additional medical records and examinations.

The case is being remanded for additional development due to the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 and VCAA requirements.