PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) Board decisions

The Board found that the veteran does not currently have PTSD and his diabetes mellitus is controlled by a restricted diet. The claim for service connection for PTSD was denied, as there was no diagnosis of PTSD. The claim for an increased rating for diabetes mellitus was also denied due to lack of evidence showing it requires insulin therapy or other specific treatment.

The veteran's PTSD is currently evaluated as 50 percent disabling, but the Board finds that it does not meet the criteria for an evaluation in excess of this level.,The residuals from a shell fragment wound to the right arm are not manifested by symptoms warranting a compensable evaluation.

The veteran's claim for an initial disability rating in excess of 50 percent for post-traumatic stress disorder is being remanded to the RO for further development and consideration.

The case is being remanded due to the need to obtain additional records from the Social Security Administration.

The Board has granted an effective date of July 31, 2004 for a 100% evaluation for service-connected PTSD.

The veteran's PTSD rating was increased to 100 percent effective from June 1, 2002. The Board previously denied a higher rating prior to September 5, 2000.

The Board determined that the veteran does not have PTSD due to in-service stressors and denied his claim for service connection.

The veteran's PTSD was granted a rating of 70 percent effective June 21, 2000. The other claims for increased ratings were also granted.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for service connection of PTSD, finding that he did not meet all eligibility criteria for a liberalizing law or VA issue and thus could not be granted retroactive benefits.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development to determine her eligibility for specially adapted housing, a special home adaptation grant, and an automobile and adaptive equipment or adaptive equipment only.

The Board denied the claims for earlier effective dates and increased ratings, finding that there was no clear and unmistakable error in previous decisions.

The Board has remanded the case due to issues related to reopening a claim for service connection and developing evidence for a PTSD claim based on in-service personal assault.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for PTSD and Hepatitis C. The veteran was not engaged in combat, and his claimed stressors were not independently verified.

The veteran's claim for an initial disability rating in excess of 50 percent for post-traumatic stress disorder has been remanded due to the need for additional VA examination and consideration of new evidence.

The Board has remanded the case due to issues related to whether new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen a claim for service connection for a chronic acquired psychiatric disorder, including PTSD. The veteran's claim is currently in the process of being reviewed.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD should be remanded due to insufficient evidence of verified inservice stressors. The RO is instructed to attempt verification and schedule a VA psychiatric examination.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals denied the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD, finding no current diagnosis and insufficient evidence linking his symptoms to his military service.

The Board has determined that the grant of service connection for PTSD and entitlement to Chapter 35 Dependents' Educational Assistance was clearly and unmistakably erroneous due to a lack of qualifying Federal service at the time of the stressor, leading to the proper severance of these benefits.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an earlier effective date of August 10, 1999 for service connection of PTSD. The veteran did not initially seek this benefit and no evidence was provided to support such a claim prior to August 1999.

The veteran's claims for an increased evaluation for PTSD and TDIU are being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining updated medical evidence and notifying the veteran of what specific evidence is needed to substantiate his claims.