PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) decisions — 2007

The Board denied the veteran's claims of entitlement to service connection for PTSD, a skin disability secondary to herbicide exposure, and depression. The decision found that new evidence did not raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating these claims.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development, including a VA psychiatric examination to determine the current level of his service-connected PTSD and differentiate its symptoms from any nonservice-connected conditions such as Alzheimer's disease. The TDIU issue will also be addressed in light of this additional evidence.

The Board has remanded the case for a videoconference hearing due to instances of 'inaudible' in the transcript. The issues regarding PTSD and right knee disability are still pending.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for PTSD, finding that service connection was established and the current effective date of October 22, 2003, was appropriate.

The veteran's claims for increased ratings and earlier effective dates were denied. The veteran is already receiving the maximum schedular evaluation for tinnitus.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD because there was no credible supporting evidence of a non-combat stressor, and the veteran did not engage in combat with the enemy. The diagnosis of PTSD was based on uncorroborated statements from the veteran.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD because there was no verified in-service stressor and his reported combat experiences were not supported by official records. The diagnosis of PTSD was based on a non-verified stressor, and thus service connection could not be established.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected PTSD contributed substantially and materially to his death, caused by rhabdomyolysis, stroke, poorly controlled diabetes mellitus, depression, and aggravated diabetes.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for service connection of PTSD, finding that the earliest date of entitlement was August 24, 1993.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development to determine if the veteran engaged in combat and whether his current symptoms are related to service, including PTSD and undiagnosed illnesses.

The veteran's claims for service connection for various conditions have been granted, but the specific evaluations and effective dates are not specified.,Some issues remain pending as they were not addressed in this decision.

The Board has decided to remand the case for further development due to unavailability of service medical records and incomplete information regarding stressors. The veteran is asked to provide additional information about his alleged stressors, including dates, locations, witnesses, casualties, and units involved.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for PTSD and hypertension, finding no competent medical evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been received to reopen the claim for service connection for PTSD. However, additional development is required regarding the underlying service connection claims due to conflicting evidence of a current diagnosis of PTSD.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for various conditions, including bilateral hearing loss, PTSD, an ulcer disorder, hypertension, allergic rhinitis, and a skin disorder. The reasons given were that there was no evidence of these conditions in service or until after separation from service, and that the veteran did not engage in combat or have a diagnosed PTSD.

The veteran is seeking an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for PTSD, and also wants to know if the assigned effective date was based on a clear and unmistakable error (CUE). The case must be remanded for further action.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the veteran's claimed in-service stressors and a need for further examination.

The Board has remanded the veteran's claims for service connection due to incomplete information and need for additional development, including obtaining ship logs/histories and treatment records from his service vessels.

The Board has determined that a remand is necessary to allow the veteran an opportunity to provide more specific information regarding his alleged stressor events, including approximate dates and locations.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for further evaluation of his service-connected PTSD and its impact on his employability.