PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) Board decisions

The Board has granted service connection for PTSD and dysthymia, with the latter being granted on a secondary basis due to its relationship to the veteran's service-connected PTSD. The decision is based on evidence of in-service personal assault leading to PTSD.

The VA denied the veteran's claim for service connection of PTSD due to insufficient evidence in his case file, including a prior psychiatric evaluation during separation from active duty.

The veteran's claim for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) is being remanded due to the need for additional medical opinions and records.

The VA denied the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD due to a lack of credible supporting evidence of an inservice stressor event and because no diagnosis of PTSD based on such a verified stressor was found.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an effective date prior to December 5, 2000 for a 100% disability evaluation for PTSD and also denied his claim regarding military severance pay.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have current right ear hearing loss or a seizure disorder, and there is no evidence of these conditions during service. The claim for PTSD warrants a 30 percent evaluation, but not higher. Hypothyroidism is currently rated as noncompensable. Hodgkin's disease is in remission.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD as there was no verified inservice stressor and the veteran did not engage in combat with the enemy.

The VA has determined that the veteran's PTSD does not meet the criteria for a higher rating, as his symptoms do not warrant an evaluation in excess of 50 percent.

The veteran's lung cancer is presumed to be due to herbicide exposure during service. The low back and cardiac conditions are not related to service, while PTSD warrants a 70% evaluation effective August 5, 2002.

The veteran's claim for an increased rating for PTSD, currently rated 50 percent, is being remanded to the RO for further development and consideration.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for PTSD and an increased evaluation for his left knee disability. The veteran was not granted service connection for PTSD due to lack of evidence linking it to in-service stressors, but he was awarded a 20% evaluation for traumatic arthritis of the left knee.

The veteran has withdrawn his appeal on all issues related to increased ratings for service-connected PTSD, right knee injury, and shell fragment wound of the right forearm.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD due to new and material evidence. However, further development is needed to verify the inservice stressors that led to the diagnosis of PTSD.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder, a heart condition, and a chronic condition manifested by glass ingestion due to lack of evidence linking these conditions to his active military service.

The Board has determined that further development and clarification are needed to address the veteran's claims for PTSD, personality disorder, and upper lip scar. The appeal is being REMANDED to obtain verification of stressors related to PTSD and personal assaults, as well as a clarifying medical opinion regarding the diagnoses and etiology of current psychiatric conditions.

The Board has ordered further development due to the need for additional evidence and clarification. The case is now being remanded to the RO for the requested development, including obtaining medical records and arranging a psychiatric examination.

The VA determined that the veteran's PTSD does not warrant an evaluation in excess of 50 percent, as it only manifests with reduced reliability and productivity.

The Board has remanded the case due to issues related to service connection for PTSD and a need for additional development of evidence.

The case is remanded due to incomplete service medical records and the need for a supplemental statement of the case. The veteran also requested a Travel Board hearing, which should be scheduled.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for TDIU benefits, finding that December 20, 1999 is the earliest date of receipt of a new claim and thus the effective date.