PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) decisions — 2012

The Board has determined that the Veteran's PTSD is due to his service, specifically his work at a hospital in Japan during the Vietnam War where he witnessed seriously injured patients. As such, the claim for PTSD is granted.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have a current bilateral hearing loss disability, a psychiatric disorder (including PTSD and depression), or a skin disorder (chronic dermatitis and onychomycosis) due to service. The decision is in favor of granting service connection for the skin disorder.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal for service connection for a psychiatric disorder other than PTSD prior to the Board's decision.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining VA and private treatment records, Social Security Administration records, and a VA psychiatric examination to determine if any current psychiatric disorder is related to service.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD, finding that his claimed stressors were not verified and that there was no credible supporting evidence of their occurrence.

The Veteran's PTSD warrants a 70 percent rating, but not higher. The Board also granted entitlement to TDIU due to service-connected PTSD.

The Veteran's PTSD has been rated at 70 percent since March 17, 2008. Prior to that date, the Veteran was granted a TDIU based on his service-connected PTSD.

The Board has remanded the claims of increase for PTSD and service connection for a cervical spine disability due to new evidence submitted by the Veteran's attorney in November 2011, including VA records since May 2007.

The Veteran's acquired psychiatric disorder, including PTSD and Adjustment Disorder, is found to be related to his in-service stressors. Service connection for these conditions is granted.

The Veteran's appeal is to determine if an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for PTSD can be granted. The RO has already assigned a June 5, 2006 effective date.

The Board found that the Veteran did not meet the criteria for service connection as her claimed psychiatric disorder is not shown to be related to active duty service.

The Board found that the Veteran did not submit a valid claim for service connection for a psychiatric disorder prior to January 24, 2007. As such, an earlier effective date is denied.

The Veteran has been granted compensation under the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for a psychiatric disorder as the result of VA treatment in December 2003, with carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment or similar instance of fault on VA's part being identified as the proximate cause.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD, requires further development and review. The case is being remanded to allow for additional evidence to be obtained and a VA examination to determine if any diagnosed psychiatric disability is related to military service.

The Veteran's PTSD is found to be related to his military service, and the claim for service connection is granted.

The Veteran's PTSD has been evaluated at a 30 percent rating throughout the appeal period, with no evidence of higher ratings due to more severe symptoms or impairment.

The Veteran's panic disorder with agoraphobia and generalized anxiety disorder are related to service, and the Board has granted service connection for these conditions.

The Veteran's death was not determined to be service-connected, and the claim for DIC benefits under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1318 is denied as he did not meet the eligibility criteria.

The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for his service-connected PTSD is being remanded due to the need for a new VA examination to assess the current severity of his condition.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development of his mental health treatment records, including from a private psychologist and VA facilities. The case will be reviewed again after the additional evidence is obtained.