Acquired psychiatric disorder decisions — 2012

The Board has decided to remand the case for further development, including obtaining missing service separation examination and records of any investigations into allegations of inappropriate behavior by drill instructors. A VA psychiatric examination is also required.

The Board denied service connection for schizophrenia in April 2003 and found that the new evidence submitted since then is not material to reopen the claim.

The Board has determined that further development is needed to determine the nature and likely etiology of any current back disability, as well as whether a psychiatric disability is related to service. The claims are being remanded for these purposes.

The Veteran's claims for service connection and increased ratings were denied. The Board is remanding the case to allow for further development.

The Board found that the Veteran's current low back disability is not related to his service, and denied service connection for a right eye disability. The psychiatric disability was granted as it is at least as likely as not related to service.

The Board has remanded the case for further development due to incomplete records of psychological testing conducted during service. The Appellant seeks service connection for a psychiatric disorder.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder is being remanded due to the need for further development and examination.

The case is being remanded for further development, including a VA examination to determine the relationship between the Veteran's current psychiatric disability and service.

The Board found no verified stressor upon which a diagnosis of PTSD was based, and thus denied the claim for service connection.

The Veteran's claims for service connection and TDIU are being remanded due to the need for additional development, including a new VA examination.

The Veteran's service-connected psychiatric, right ankle, and lumbar spine disabilities have rendered him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation since April 4, 1990.

The Veteran is seeking service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, including PTSD. The Board has determined that additional development is needed to determine if the Veteran's current condition is related to his military service.

The Veteran's claims for service connection and evaluations were denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support a finding of in-service onset or relationship to service for most conditions, except for hepatitis C which was granted up to 30 percent prior to October 26, 2009.

The Board found that the Veteran's acquired psychiatric disability, including dysthymic disorder and depression, did not develop as a result of service. The preexisting condition was presumed to have existed prior to service.

The Board has remanded the claim due to insufficient medical opinion regarding whether the Veteran's acquired psychiatric disorder is aggravated by his service-connected prostate cancer or erectile dysfunction.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, to include PTSD, is being remanded due to the need for a Travel Board hearing.

The Board found that the Veteran did not meet the criteria for service connection as his claimed psychiatric disorders are not related to his military service.

The Veteran's acquired psychiatric disorders, primarily PTSD, were not found to be related to service due to the lack of credible in-service stressors and no evidence corroborating his claims.

The Veteran does not have a diagnosed acquired psychiatric disorder, including posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and the Board finds that his claims for service connection are denied.

The Veteran's service connection claim for PTSD was denied as the evidence does not meet the DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for PTSD.,The Veteran's nonservice-connected pension benefits claim was denied due to intoxication from alcohol consumption during a motor vehicle accident, which rendered him ineligible based on willful misconduct.