PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) Board decisions

The Veteran's claim for an increased evaluation greater than 70 percent for PTSD from June 16, 2005 to March 4, 2007 was denied by the Board of Veterans' Appeals.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to conflicting evidence regarding the severity of his PTSD. The Board will seek further development and an examination to determine if a higher rating is warranted.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for increased ratings on an extraschedular basis, finding that the current schedular evaluations adequately reflect his disability picture.

The Board finds that the evidence is in equipoise as to whether the Veteran has an acquired psychiatric disorder, including PTSD, that cannot be dissociated from his active service. Therefore, service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, including PTSD, is granted.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for PTSD and psychiatric disability other than PTSD, as well as his claim for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities, are denied. The Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of PTSD or any other psychiatric condition that can be linked to service.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for PTSD, diabetes mellitus type II, and hypertension were denied. The Board found that the Veteran did not have a diagnosis of PTSD as a result of an in-service stressor or attributable to service. Diabetes mellitus type II was not shown to be related to service or secondary to service-connected conditions. Hypertension was also not shown to be related to service or secondary to service-connected conditions.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's PTSD is related to his service in Korea, and thus grants service connection for PTSD.

The Veteran's PTSD is currently rated at 50 percent, and the Board has granted a higher rating of 70 percent.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's PTSD is related to his in-service stressors and grants service connection for PTSD.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed, including a VA examination to determine whether the Veteran's PTSD is related to his military service and obtaining treatment records from February 2005 to August 2005.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including PTSD, bilateral hearing loss, and tinnitus, do not render him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD is granted as his diagnosis of PTSD is supported by evidence showing he experienced combat-related incidents during service, and there is no clear and convincing evidence to the contrary.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD is granted as his diagnosed PTSD is related to his in-service stressors, which are consistent with the places, types, and circumstances of his service.

The Board has determined that the appellant does not have a current diagnosis of PTSD or any other psychiatric disorder, and therefore service connection for these conditions cannot be established. The claim is denied.

The Board has reopened the Veteran's claims for service connection for a psychiatric disorder, including PTSD, and hypertension. The new evidence received since the last final denial relates to these conditions and raises a reasonable possibility of substantiating them.

The Veteran's request for service connection for PTSD is being remanded due to the need for a Board videoconference hearing.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD is being remanded due to the need for a VA examination and review of his claimed stressors.

The Veteran's service-connected PTSD is found to have contributed substantially or materially to his death from acute myocardial infarction. Service connection for the cause of death is granted.

The Veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses incurred at Florida Hospital - Ormond Memorial on February 28, 2008 was denied as the treatment did not meet the statutory definition of 'emergency treatment'. The Board found that the emergency room visit was not a medical emergency and thus VA could not provide payment.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining an opinion on whether new and material evidence has been received to reopen a claim of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder other than PTSD. The Veteran's claims for PTSD will also be considered.