PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) Board decisions

The veteran's service-connected disabilities alone do not render him so helpless as to be unable to care for himself, protect himself from the hazards or dangers incident to his environment, or attend to the needs of nature. The Board finds that the preponderance of the probative evidence is against the veteran's claim for entitlement to SMC.

The veteran's claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD, is being remanded due to the need to verify stressors and obtain a VA examination.

The veteran's PTSD does not render him unemployable, as his other conditions and substance abuse issues prevent him from securing or following a substantially gainful occupation.

The Board has ordered additional development to determine if the veteran engaged in combat with the enemy and whether his reported stressors occurred. The case will be remanded for a VA psychiatric examination to assess PTSD, and for a right shoulder disability examination.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claims for service connection for left ear hearing loss, bilateral knee disability, and anxiety. The claim of service connection for right ear hearing loss is granted.

The veteran's claim for an initial rating in excess of 30 percent for his service-connected PTSD is being remanded due to the need for additional treatment records and information from the VA Medical Center and Veteran's Outreach Center.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for PTSD and residuals of a laceration to the neck, finding that the injuries were caused by willful misconduct. The case is remanded for further development.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for proper VCAA notification and additional medical examination of his PTSD. The case will be reviewed after these steps are completed.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not currently have PTSD and therefore, service connection for PTSD is denied.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) has determined that the veteran does not have PTSD as a result of an in-service stressor and therefore, service connection for PTSD is denied.

The Board has determined that the veteran's PTSD warrants a 70 percent rating, effective from September 27, 2004.

The Board has determined that the effective date for service connection of PTSD cannot be earlier than September 13, 2002 due to lack of evidence of an informal or formal claim prior to this date.

The veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including verifying stressor events and obtaining relevant medical records.

The VA determined that the veteran's PTSD warrants a 30 percent disability rating, which is the maximum schedular rating available for this condition. The claim for service connection of a lung condition was not addressed in this decision.

The veteran's appeal for service connection for PTSD has been withdrawn, resulting in the dismissal of her case.

The veteran is entitled to an effective date of April 20, 1971 for the grant of service connection for PTSD.

The veteran's request for payment or reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses incurred on December 13, 2005 at St. Luke's Hospital is denied as the treatment was not rendered in an emergency situation and VA facilities were feasibly available.

The veteran's PTSD was granted service connection and assigned a 50 percent rating effective January 20, 2001. The RO increased the rating for residuals of a gunshot wound to the left buttock from noncompensable to 40 percent effective September 29, 2004. A separate 10 percent rating was assigned for sciatic neuropathy, left.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including VA examinations and obtaining updated medical records. The veteran's claims for increased PTSD rating and TDIU will be reconsidered based on the additional evidence.

The Board has denied the claim of service connection for PTSD as no new and material evidence was received to substantiate the claim, despite the veteran's allegations about a stressor event in service.