PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) Board decisions

The VA denied payment or reimbursement for unauthorized care provided at Park Place Hospital due to the treatment not being for an adjudicated service-connected disability. However, it was found that PTSD was effectively total and permanent in nature within the meaning of 38 C.F.R. § 17.120.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for a certificate of eligibility for financial assistance in acquiring specially adapted housing or a home adaptation grant due to his service-connected disabilities not meeting the regulatory requirements.

The Board has granted service connection for PTSD and assigned a 30 percent disability rating from November 25, 1997. The RO also determined that the August 13, 1947 rating decision assigning noncompensable evaluation to residuals of a gunshot wound was clear and unmistakable error, and assigned an increased (compensable) evaluation of 10 percent retroactive to June 27, 1947. The veteran's claim for an initial evaluation in excess of 50 percent for PTSD remains on appeal.

The veteran's service-connected PTSD is rated at the highest possible disability rating of 100 percent, reflecting severe impairment in his ability to work and maintain social relationships.

The veteran's PTSD has been productive of total occupational and social impairment, warranting a 100 percent evaluation.

The Board has determined that the veteran's PTSD warrants a 70 percent disability evaluation, reflecting significant occupational and social impairment.

The Board is remanding the case due to insufficient evidence of a verified stressor for PTSD, and new evidentiary procedures based on personal assault need to be followed.

The Board denied the claim for an increased disability evaluation for PTSD, finding that the current rating of 50% is appropriate based on the severity of symptoms and impairment. The claim for benefits under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 was also denied as there was no evidence linking the appellant's left lower extremity amputation to treatment received at a VA facility.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the claim of service connection for PTSD. The veteran's claim is now considered on its merits.

The Board found that the veteran's claimed stressors were not verified and did not occur during service, thus denying his claim for service connection for PTSD.

The Board found no evidence of a diagnosed acquired psychiatric disorder during service or within one year of separation, and concluded that any current conditions are not related to the veteran's military service.

The veteran is seeking an increased rating for his service-connected PTSD, but the case has been remanded due to incomplete records and need for a new examination.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development due to a request for a personal hearing at the RO.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection due to lack of new and material evidence, as well as insufficient medical evidence supporting a current psychiatric disorder or hearing loss. The gastrointestinal claim was reopened but not granted.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claims for service connection for a psychiatric disorder other than PTSD and PTSD, but finds that VA has not fully assisted in developing facts pertinent to his claim.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals dismissed the motion for revision of a decision based on clear and unmistakable error, stating that the requirements for such a motion were not met.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for a low back disorder and a rating in excess of 30 percent for PTSD. The evidence does not support a finding that these conditions are related to military service.

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

The Board determined that the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD was not well-grounded due to lack of credible supporting evidence and failure to provide current address. The case is remanded for further development, including a hearing, medical examination, and additional information regarding alleged stressors.

The Board dismissed the appeal due to the appellant's withdrawal of the appeal before a decision was made.