PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) decisions — 2007

The Board found no credible supporting evidence for the veteran's claimed in-service stressor, resulting in denial of service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder and a total rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities.

The veteran seeks an effective date earlier than April 30, 2003 for the award of a schedular 100 percent rating for PTSD. The Board finds that such an effective date is not warranted as there was no final decision prior to which an earlier effective date could be assigned.

The veteran's low back disability is rated at 20 percent, and his service-connected disabilities do not meet the criteria for a TDIU. The appeal is denied.

The Board granted an initial disability rating of 50 percent for PTSD, but denied entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 50 percent. The case is now remanded for further development and consideration.

The veteran's appeal for increased ratings and service connection was denied. His tinnitus, bilateral hearing loss, type II diabetes mellitus, and PTSD were all evaluated based on their current status without additional rating adjustments.

The veteran's claims for service connection for various conditions, including PTSD and neck pain, were denied. The appeal is not about service connection at all.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD, finding that his current diagnosis of PTSD was not based on a verified in-service stressor and thus could not be considered service-connected.

The veteran's PTSD was granted service connection effective September 13, 2002. The Board found that a rating in excess of 50 percent for the period prior to August 15, 2006 is not warranted.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have a current diagnosis of PTSD due to any verified incident or event of active military service. Therefore, service connection for PTSD is denied.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for hypertension, low back disorder, and PTSD. The decision found that hypertension pre-existed service and was not aggravated during service, while a low back disorder is not shown to be related to service. Service connection for PTSD was also denied due to lack of corroborated stressor events.

The Board denied the veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for PTSD due to a lack of credible, verified stressors. The issue regarding reopening his neck injury claim is remanded.

The Board has determined that the veteran's erectile dysfunction is not secondary to his service-connected PTSD and therefore, does not warrant a separate rating. The VA examiner could not provide an opinion without resorting to mere speculation regarding whether the medication used for PTSD caused the erectile dysfunction. The veteran's PTSD is currently rated as 30 percent disabling due to occupational and social impairment with occasional decrease in work efficiency.

The Board has determined that the appellant's discharge from military service is a bar to VA benefits due to his conviction of forgery, uttering, and giving worthless checks.

The Board has determined that the veteran's PTSD is related to experiences during active service and grants his claim for service connection.

The Board found no evidence of a current diagnosis of PTSD and concluded that the veteran did not experience any stressors during service. Therefore, service connection for PTSD is denied.

The Board has determined that the veteran's PTSD was manifested by moderate symptoms from June 6, 2000 through January 20, 2001; severe symptoms from January 21, 2001 through January 25, 2001; moderate to severe symptoms from January 26, 2001 through October 23, 2002; total occupational and social impairment with inpatient treatment for a period of over 21 days from October 24, 2002 through December 2, 2002; severe symptoms from June 29, 2004 through October 31, 2004; and moderate to severe symptoms from November 1, 2004.

The Board denied the veteran's claim of service connection for PTSD, finding that there was no verifiable stressor related to his in-service experiences and thus insufficient evidence to establish a link between his current symptoms and service.

The Board has decided to remand the case for further development and consideration, including obtaining relevant VA treatment records and SSA award documentation.

The VA has granted a 50 percent evaluation for the service-connected PTSD, which is currently rated at 30 percent. The increase in symptoms and social impairment have been considered.

The Board has remanded the case for further development to confirm alleged stressors and determine if they occurred during service, and for a VA examination to assess whether any diagnosed psychiatric disorder is related to the veteran's active duty service.