The Board of Veterans' Appeals has denied the veteran's claim for service connection for rectal incontinence, finding no medical evidence linking his current condition to military service.
The deciding factor: There is no competent medical evidence attributing the veteran's current rectal condition to his military service.
- Claimed conditions
- rectal incontinence, hemorrhoid surgery
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- September 9, 2003
- Citation
- 0323227
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. Search VA.gov for the original decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 0323227.
What this means for you
A denial is a starting point, not the end of the road. You can see why this claim fell short — and, if you are still inside the one-year window, the appeal lanes that may remain open to you.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for rectal incontinence, finding no evidence that it was caused or aggravated by his service-connected disabilities or any other in-service injury.
- Granted
The Board has granted the Veteran's appeals regarding various rating reductions and severances, restoring his eligibility for SMC, automobile and adaptive equipment, specially adapted housing, and DEA benefits. The issues on appeal were related to improper decisions made in previous rating decisions due to fraud.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for rectal incontinence and urinary incontinence due to nerve damage, as they are secondary to the Veteran's service-connected back disability. The case is being returned for an adequate opinion regarding the nature and etiology of these conditions.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's VA compensation benefits were reduced, severed and discontinued due to 'fraud' under 38 C.F.R. § 3.1(aa)(2). The AOJ is required to provide a summary of this regulation and allow the Veteran and his attorney a reasonable time to respond before readjudicating the claims.
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.