PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) decisions — 2008

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for a new VA examination to assess the current severity of his service-connected PTSD.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals has determined that the veteran does not currently have PTSD, and therefore denied his claim for service connection.

The veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD was abandoned in April 1981, and he did not file a timely appeal. The Board finds that an earlier effective date is not warranted as the claim was abandoned.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the submission of additional pertinent medical evidence and new evidence since the last Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC).

The veteran's service-connected PTSD is currently rated at 50 percent since December 2, 2005. The evidence does not show that his symptoms warrant a higher rating.

The veteran's claims for an increased rating and earlier effective date for his PTSD are being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining medical records and scheduling a VA examination.

The Board has dismissed the veteran's claims due to a failure to timely file a substantive appeal.

The Board has determined that there is not sufficient evidence to establish service connection for PTSD or dysthymia. The veteran's claims have been denied.

The Board has determined that the evidence is at least in equipoise as to whether an in-service personal assault occurred, and therefore grants service connection for PTSD.

The Board found that there is no current medical diagnosis of PTSD and thus denied the veteran's claim for service connection.

The Board has determined that a VA psychiatrist's opinion is needed to determine whether the veteran's psychiatric disability, including PTSD and adjustment disorder with depression, was either the principal or contributory cause of his suicide. Additionally, it needs to be determined if the gunshot wound to the head causing death was related to service-connected seizure disorder.

The Board has granted service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The veteran's claims were previously denied due to lack of well-groundedness and the failure to provide adequate notice.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete information and need for additional development, including obtaining treatment records and conducting a VA examination.

The veteran's PTSD symptoms do not meet the criteria for a higher rating, as they are primarily characterized by insomnia, depression, and anxiety without significant impairment in work or social functioning.

The veteran's service-connected residuals of a shell fragment wound to the right thigh are rated at 10 percent, and his PTSD is also rated at 30 percent. The RO denied both increased evaluations.

The Board has determined that further development is needed to verify the veteran's claimed stressors and determine if he currently suffers from PTSD as a result of these incidents. The case will be remanded for this purpose.

The Board has remanded the case for a new VA examination to determine if the veteran's PTSD is linked to his claimed assault in Australia, and to address whether there is a link between current symptomatology and the alleged assault.

The veteran's PTSD is currently rated at 50 percent, the maximum schedular rating available. The Board found that his symptoms do not warrant a higher evaluation as they do not meet the criteria for a 70 percent rating under Diagnostic Code 9411.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for PTSD, gastrointestinal condition, vision problems due to an undiagnosed illness, and headaches. The denial is based on a lack of verified in-service stressors for PTSD and insufficient evidence of current diagnoses or linkages to service for the other conditions.

The Board found that the veteran's PTSD did not warrant a higher initial evaluation from January 14, 2005 to March 6, 2005 and from March 7, 2005 onward. The evidence showed reduced reliability and productivity but no deficiencies in most areas as required for a 70% rating.