PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) decisions — 2001

The veteran's service-connected PTSD prevents him from securing and following gainful employment.

The veteran is seeking increased ratings for his service-connected PTSD. He was initially rated 30 percent disabling prior to March 10, 2000 and now seeks a higher rating from that date.

The veteran's service-connected disabilities do not necessitate the care or assistance of another person on a regular basis to attend to the activities of daily living and to protect him from the hazards of his daily environment, thus denying entitlement to special monthly compensation.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for various conditions, including knee disabilities, PTSD, urinary tract disorders, sarcoidosis, and scars. The reasons are not provided in this text.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for additional evidence and a VA psychiatric examination.

The Board has determined that the veteran is statutorily barred from appealing the November 1995 and March 1996 rating decisions due to a failure to timely file a substantive appeal.

The Board found that the appellant did not serve in combat and could not establish service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, dysthymic disorder or anxiety disorder. The VA examinations and medical records do not support a finding of these conditions.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim of service connection for PTSD based on new and material evidence submitted since the last denial in 1987. The veteran now has a chance to have his claim evaluated on its merits.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for a right shoulder disorder and PTSD, finding that there was no evidence of chronic conditions in service or continuity of symptomatology after service.

The veteran's claim for an earlier effective date of July 15, 1997 for a 100% evaluation for service-connected PTSD was granted based on VA medical records dated within one year prior to that date.

The veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for payment of additional compensation for a dependent spouse was denied.,The veteran's claim for additional monthly compensation for his child from 1992-1994 was also denied due to untimely filing.

The veteran's PTSD warrants a 100 percent evaluation effective August 20, 1998. The RO increased the initial rating to 50 percent effective July 1, 1999.

The Board has determined that the appellant's PTSD is so severe that it prevents her from obtaining or maintaining employment, warranting a 100 percent disability rating.

The Board denied service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder and bipolar disorder in April 1984, which is final. The veteran's claim was reopened based on new evidence submitted after the April 1984 decision, but an effective date earlier than July 14, 1994, is legally precluded.

The Board denied an earlier effective date for service connection of PTSD, finding that the earliest possible effective date is September 13, 1996.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence was submitted to reopen the claim, but it is unclear whether the appellant's PTSD qualifies as a bar to VA benefits due to his discharge.

The veteran's claim for an increased disability evaluation for PTSD with major depressive disorder is being remanded due to the need to obtain additional medical records and ensure compliance with the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA) has denied the veteran's claim for service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder due to a lack of evidence supporting the occurrence of in-service stressors and conflicting diagnoses within the record.

The veteran's PTSD is not service connected as it does not meet the criteria for a diagnosis.,His skin, pain, and stomach symptoms are due to known diagnoses.

The veteran's claims for service connection for periodontitis and dental caries, PTSD, hemorrhoids, low back pain and chronic degenerative arthritis, vertigo, and onychomycosis hyloma have been denied as a matter of law due to the lack of compensable conditions. The claim for VA outpatient treatment is referred to the RO for further development.