Acquired psychiatric disorder decisions — 2011

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have an acquired psychiatric disorder that was incurred or aggravated by his active service. The claims for a skin disorder, bilateral hearing loss, hypertension, low back disorder and bilateral leg disorder are also denied as there is insufficient evidence to support these claims.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, including Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Schizophrenic Reaction, is before the Board again after previous denials. The case requires further development to address new evidence of personal assault stressors and a VA examination.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the claim of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, diagnosed as schizophrenia. The Veteran's current diagnosis is related to his active service.

The Board granted an effective date of August 31, 2000 for the award of a 100% evaluation for paranoid schizophrenia and denied entitlement to TDIU prior to that date.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to insufficient examination and diagnostic testing regarding the Veteran's claim of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, including PTSD.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development, including verification of a claimed stressor and obtaining Commendation Medal Certificates. The issues include service connection for PTSD, peripheral neuropathy of the lower extremities, and hypertensive heart disease.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD was denied as he does not have a diagnosis of PTSD in accordance with DSM-IV.,The Veteran's claim for service connection for a right foot disorder was also denied as there is no evidence that his current condition is related to his period of active service.

The Board has ordered additional development due to the need for updated treatment records from the Veteran's Vet Center and VA Medical Center in Wilmington, Delaware. The case will be returned to the Board after these records are obtained.

The Veteran's claimed acquired psychiatric disorder was not incurred or aggravated by service, and may not be presumed to have been so incurred or aggravated.

The Board found that the Veteran's current headaches and psychiatric disability are not related to his service, specifically the physical altercation in 1986. The evidence does not support a finding of service connection.

The Veteran's claims for service connection have been granted for a skin disorder (mucous patch), left ear hearing loss, right ear hearing loss, and tinnitus due to presumed exposure to herbicide agents. The remaining claims are pending.

The Board has remanded the case due to a scheduling issue, and will reschedule the Veteran for a video-conference hearing at their local VA office in Texas.

The Board has reopened the Veteran's claim of service connection for a psychiatric disorder based on new and material evidence submitted since the November 2005 rating decision.

The Board has remanded the case to the RO for further evidentiary development due to conflicting opinions on whether the Veteran's current psychiatric conditions are related to military service.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have a diagnosed PTSD and his depressive disorder is unrelated to service. The bilateral knee disorder claim also fails as there is no credible evidence of an in-service injury or stressor.

The case is being remanded for further development and adjudication of the Veteran's claims, including service connection for a psychiatric disorder other than PTSD and TDIU.

The Board has reopened the claim for service connection for a left knee disability and granted it. The Veteran's current left knee disability is found to be related to his service-connected right knee disability, which qualifies as secondary service connection.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining inpatient treatment records from Fort Gordon and Maryland, determining if the Veteran had a tattoo during active duty, and providing an opinion on whether any acquired psychiatric disorder or hepatitis C is related to service.

The Board has remanded the case for further development due to inadequate medical opinions regarding the Veteran's hepatitis C and PTSD diagnoses.