PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) decisions — 2026

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities leave him in need of regular aid and attendance, which is granted for special monthly compensation based on aid and attendance. The Veteran does not meet the criteria for housebound status due to his single disability.

The Veteran's PTSD prior to November 12, 2019 did not meet the criteria for a 70 percent disability rating due to insufficient occupational and social impairment.

The Veteran's eligibility to enroll in the PCAFC program was denied due to a lack of personal care services and supervision. The Board has decided to remand the case for further development based on recent legal decisions.

The appeal for service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder was dismissed due to the death of the appellant.

The Veteran's service-connected major depressive disorder with PTSD has precluded her from securing and following substantially gainful employment since July 11, 2024.

The Veteran's claim for a higher rating prior to November 6, 2020, for his service-connected PTSD and MDD was denied as the evidence did not show total occupational and social impairment. The appeal of entitlement to TDIU from November 6, 2020, is dismissed.

The Board has dismissed all the issues of entitlement to a compensable disability rating or service connection for various conditions, as the Veteran withdrew his appeal prior to the promulgation of a decision.

The Veteran's PTSD with MDD and anxious distress is granted as the Board found reasonable doubt in favor of his claim, linking it to an in-service head injury.,The Veteran's post-traumatic headaches are also granted due to a link between the in-service incident and current symptoms.

The Board has remanded the claim for service connection of PTSD due to a duty-to-assist error. The Veteran's experience in combat is conceded, and VA medical records indicate PTSD symptoms and other diagnoses.

The Board has remanded the case for further development to obtain opinions regarding the nature and etiology of the Veteran's claimed obstructive sleep apnea (OSA).

The Veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD is granted, while the claim for an acquired psychiatric disability other than PTSD remains denied.

The Veteran's service-connected PTSD and depressive disorder resulted in total occupational and social impairment for the entire initial rating period from June 4, 2014 through May 15, 2017. The Board granted a 100 percent disability rating.

The Veteran's PTSD symptoms have caused occupational and social impairment with deficiencies in most areas, warranting an initial 70 percent disability rating.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date and increased rating for PTSD with persistent depressive disorder was denied. The appeal for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 is dismissed.

The Veteran is granted an effective date of August 26, 2011 for the assignment of service connection for PTSD. The effective date is based on the later of the date of claim (August 26, 2011) and the date entitlement arose (prior to August 26, 2011).

The Board denied the Veteran's appeal as all reductions and severances of service connection were found to be proper due to fraud committed by the Veteran and his spouse.

The Veteran's OSA is granted as secondary to his service-connected PTSD.,The Veteran's PTSD is rated at 70 percent, effective from May 31, 2025.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss was denied as there is no current disability.,PTSD was granted an initial rating of 70 percent, but not more than that. The Veteran did not meet the criteria for a higher rating.

The Veteran's service-connected PTSD alone prevents him from obtaining and maintaining gainful employment, leading to a TDIU determination. Additionally, the Veteran is eligible for basic eligibility to Dependents' Educational Assistance (DEA).

The Veteran's service-connected PTSD, alcohol use disorder, and persistent depressive disorder do not prevent him from securing or maintaining substantially gainful employment. The Board denied his claim for TDIU as the evidence does not show that these disabilities render him completely unable to secure or follow any substantially gainful occupation.