PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) Board decisions

The Board has reopened the appellant's claim of service connection for PTSD and found that new evidence supports a diagnosis of PTSD linked to in-service stress. The other claims are pending further review.

The veteran's claim for service connection for burns to the face and chest was denied as there is no current evidence of such residuals. The claim for a higher evaluation for PTSD remains pending.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claims for service connection for a gastrointestinal disorder, joint pain and spine pain, and post-traumatic stress disorder are not well-grounded. The claim for right hip disorder is denied as new and material evidence was not presented since December 1994. The claim for hepatitis C is also denied due to lack of new and material evidence.

The VA denied the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD, finding that there was no link between his current symptoms and an inservice stressor.

The veteran's PTSD is currently rated at 50 percent disabling, and the Board found that his symptoms do not warrant a higher rating. The veteran also failed to meet the requirements for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disability.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder and Reiter's syndrome, finding that there is no medical evidence to support these claims.

The Board denied a claim for an increased evaluation for PTSD, finding that the evidence did not support a rating in excess of 10 percent.

The Board has granted the veteran's claims for service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder and denied his claim for esophageal condition, finding that there is competent medical evidence of a current disability related to in-service stressors.

The Board has determined that the veteran's PTSD warrants a 70 percent evaluation, reflecting severe and ongoing symptoms including anger management issues, suicidal ideation, and isolation.

The Board has remanded the case to the RO for further development and adjudication, including consideration of whether the appellant may be entitled to dependency and indemnity compensation based on hypothetical entitlement to a total disability rating prior to her husband's death.

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

The Board is remanding the case to obtain additional medical records and review the issues of service connection for bipolar disorder and whether new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the claim of PTSD.

The veteran's PTSD was initially rated at 10 percent and later increased to 30 percent. The Board found that the disability picture warranted a higher rating from November 23, 1993 through August 8, 1998, but not for periods after.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD, finding that there was no credible evidence to support the occurrence of a stressor related to his in-service duties as a truck driver in Vietnam.

The Board has remanded the case due to ambiguity in the circumstances surrounding the VA examination of October 1999. The veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD will be reviewed again with a new examination by two different psychiatrists.

The Board granted a 30 percent evaluation for PTSD effective from November 7, 1996. The veteran's other claims were not addressed in this decision.

The veteran's claims for higher disability ratings for service-connected PTSD were denied. The RO assigned a 30 percent rating effective from April 15, 1999.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for an earlier effective date of January 28, 1994, for a 100% rating for service-connected post-traumatic stress disorder.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and PTSD due to a lack of evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate examination and treatment records, requiring further evaluation of the veteran's PTSD.