PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) Board decisions

PTSD was not manifested by occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity from January 14, 2002 to June 16, 2004.,PTSD was not manifested by total occupational and social impairment beginning June 17, 2004.

The Veteran's PTSD and major depressive disorder have been medically attributed to in-service combat exposure in Southwest Asia.,Based on the preponderance of the evidence, the Veteran was engaged in combat in Southwest Asia.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including verification of a claimed in-service personal assault and an examination to determine if PTSD is related to service.

The Veteran's appeal for a compensable evaluation under 38 C.F.R. § 3.324 is denied as he currently has a compensable disability rating for PTSD, and the other service-connected disabilities are non-compensable.

The Board found sufficient evidence of a current diagnosis of PTSD and credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressors occurred, including sexual assault during service. Resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, the claim for service connection for PTSD is granted.

The Board has ordered a remand to verify the appellant's claimed in-service stressors and determine if they are sufficient for service connection of PTSD.

The Board found that the Veteran's claimed PTSD was not incurred in or aggravated by his active service due to a lack of credible supporting evidence for his reported stressors.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including verifying a claimed stressor and obtaining an updated VA examination to determine if the Veteran has any current mental disorder related to his military service.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's PTSD is related to his active military service and grants the claim for service connection.

The Board found that the Veteran's claimed inservice stressful experiences and personal trauma did not meet the criteria for service connection due to a lack of credible supporting evidence.

The Board has determined that the Veteran meets the criteria for service connection of PTSD, as his symptoms align with the DSM-IV criteria and are related to stressors he experienced during service.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining Social Security Administration records and addressing whether new and material evidence has been presented to reopen the claim of service connection for PTSD.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for thoracolumbar strain has not been reopened, and his request for a higher initial evaluation for PTSD remains denied.

The Board found that the Veteran's low back disability was not incurred in or aggravated by active service and denied his claim for service connection.

The VA has determined that the appellant's service-connected PTSD and conversion disorder are more disabling than his bilateral restless leg syndrome, which is currently rated as noncompensable. The appellant's total disability rating for compensation based on individual unemployability (TDIU) claim was denied due to the predominance of his psychiatric disabilities.

The Board found that the Veteran's reported stressors were not verified and did not support a diagnosis of PTSD. The evidence does not establish service connection for PTSD.

The Veteran's impairment from his PTSD most nearly approximates occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity, without deficiencies in most areas or total occupational and social impairment. The current rating of 50 percent is appropriate.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for additional development, including verifying stressors and conducting a VA psychiatric examination.

The Board has granted service connection for degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine as secondary to a service-connected left knee disability.

The Veteran's PTSD is currently evaluated as 70 percent disabling, and the Board finds that a higher initial evaluation is not warranted.