The Board has determined that the current symptoms of the appellant's foreskin are related to his in-service circumcision, and thus service connection is granted.
The deciding factor: The evidence is in relative equipoise regarding whether the current symptomatology is related to the in-service circumcision, with a recommendation for a second circumcision supporting this relationship.
- Claimed conditions
- residuals of a circumcision
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- February 20, 2001
- Citation
- 0105026
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 0105026.
What this means for you
A grant means the Board agreed the veteran was entitled to the benefit. Decisions like this show the kind of evidence and arguments that tend to succeed for claims like it.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has reopened the Veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of a circumcision due to new and material evidence. The case is now remanded for further development, including obtaining medical opinions regarding the nature and etiology of any genitourinary disability, to include pain and scarring.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's appeal has been withdrawn, and all claims have been dismissed.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran seeks service connection for a left foot condition, circumcision residuals, and pseudofolliculitis barbae. He also claims compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for additional disability resulting from a June 1990 dental extraction.,The Veteran contends that he has residual numbness in his left front gums and teeth due to a June 1990 VA dental extraction, which resulted in complications such as numbness of the lower lip or tongue. The examiner will determine if this disability is related to carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment, or similar instance of fault on the part of VA.,The Veteran claims service connection for a left foot condition, circumcision residuals, and pseudofolliculitis barbae. He also seeks compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for additional disability resulting from a June 1990 dental extraction.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete service medical records and a need for additional development, including obtaining VA examination results.
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.