PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) Board decisions

The Board has remanded the case for a VA examination to determine if the Veteran's PTSD is related to his in-service stressors, as per the revised regulations effective July 13, 2010.

The Board has determined that a VA examination is needed to clarify whether the Veteran has a psychiatric disorder, including PTSD and schizophrenia, related to his service. The appeal will be remanded for this purpose.

The Veteran's appeal involves two issues: a request for an increased rating for PTSD and a claim for TDIU due to PTSD. The Board has determined that further action is needed, including obtaining VA medical records, arranging for the Veteran to undergo a VA examination, and considering whether referral for extra-schedular evaluation under 38 C.F.R. � 4.16(b) is appropriate.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining VA outpatient treatment records and scheduling a VA examination to determine if the Veteran's current psychiatric disorder is related to his military service. The claim will be reconsidered after these actions.

The Veteran's appeal has been withdrawn, and the case is dismissed.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including a review of the Veteran's post-service medical records and a VA examination to determine if there is sufficient evidence to concede the Veteran's claimed sexual assault stressor. The examiner will then assess whether any currently present psychiatric disorder, including PTSD, is etiologically related to his active service.

The Veteran's PTSD is currently rated at 50 percent, which reflects the moderate to serious symptoms identified in his GAF scores. The Board finds that a higher rating of 70 percent is not warranted based on the evidence.

The Board has granted service connection for PTSD based on the Veteran's reported in-service stressors, finding that his symptoms are related to fear of enemy attack and meeting the criteria for PTSD.

The Board has granted service connection for a psychiatric disorder, diagnosed as PTSD and anxiety, which represents a complete grant of the benefit sought on appeal.

The Veteran's PTSD did not meet the criteria for a higher rating prior to March 17, 2009.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and initial disability ratings were denied. The case is now pending before the Board of Veterans' Appeals.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, including PTSD, depression, schizophrenia and a mood disorder. The decision stated there was no demonstration of such conditions being related to military service.

The Veteran's appeal for an increased evaluation for his PTSD was dismissed due to the death of the appellant during the pendency of the appeal.

The Veteran's PTSD is rated at 50 percent, reflecting occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity.

The Veteran's service connection claim for PTSD is granted, as the evidence shows a diagnosis of PTSD and a link between current symptoms and in-service stressors.

The Veteran's claim for an initial rating in excess of 30 percent for PTSD is being remanded due to the need for a new VA examination.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining a psychological evaluation from May 1993 and determining if he meets the criteria for a PTSD diagnosis.

The Veteran's service-connected PTSD is currently rated at 30 percent, effective September 28, 2004. The Board finds that the evidence supports a higher initial rating of 50 percent for PTSD.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for PTSD, major depressive disorder, sleep apnea, arthritis of the right and left knees, and radiculopathy of the left lower extremity. The Board found that there was no evidence linking these conditions to her military service.

The Veteran's appeal to have an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for PTSD was dismissed because he did not file a timely appeal within one year of the October 1997 rating decision.