PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) decisions — 2008

The Board has found new and material evidence to reopen the veteran's previously denied claim of entitlement to service connection for PTSD. The issue is remanded for further development.

The Board found no evidence to support the veteran's claims of service connection for hepatitis C and PTSD, thus denying both claims.

The Board has decided that further development is needed, including a review of unit records to verify if the veteran experienced any traumatic events during his service in Vietnam. The claim will be remanded for this purpose.

The Board found that the veteran did not engage in combat and could not provide sufficient details to verify his claimed stressors. As a result, he failed to establish service connection for PTSD.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been received to reopen the veteran's claim of service connection for PTSD. The case is now remanded for further development.

The Board found that the veteran's PTSD is not service-connected due to lack of verified in-service stressors and denied his claim.

The veteran's PTSD is found to be incurred in active service due to combat stressors, and the claim for service connection is granted.

The Board has denied service connection for a left knee disability, including arthritis of the left knee. The veteran's claim for PTSD and cold weather injuries to hands and feet is also denied.

The Board has determined that the veteran's PTSD warrants a 50 percent disability rating, reflecting significant occupational and social impairment.

The veteran's PTSD is manifested by occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity, warranting a 50 percent disability rating.

The Board found that new and material evidence had not been received to reopen the claim of service connection for PTSD, as the additional medical records did not provide a diagnosis of PTSD based on verified in-service stressors.

The Board has remanded the case for further development due to an incorrect standard used by VA psychiatrists in determining whether the veteran's stressors are sufficient to produce PTSD. The case will be reviewed again with a correct definition of a 'stressor' and appropriate examination.

The Board has determined that the veteran's PTSD does not meet or approximate the criteria for a rating higher than 50 percent, as his symptoms do not warrant such a high level of disability.

The Board has denied the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD as there is no credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor occurred.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining VA medical records and a review of Dr. McClain's November 2008 psychological assessment.

The Board has granted an effective date of December 17, 1998 for the award of a 70 percent evaluation for the service-connected psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD and schizophrenia.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD due to a lack of credible supporting evidence verifying the occurrence of his claimed in-service stressors.

The VA determined that the veteran's PTSD warranted a 30 percent disability rating, effective December 15, 2004. The symptoms described were not severe enough to warrant a higher rating.

The veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD is being remanded due to the need to verify his claimed stressors and determine if he has a current diagnosis of PTSD related to those events.

The Board has determined that a VA examination is needed to assess whether the veteran's service-connected PTSD alone renders him unemployable. The case will be returned for further review.