The Veteran's rectal incontinence associated with prostate cancer residuals was granted a 60% rating prior to October 31, 2018. From that date, the Veteran is not entitled to a higher rating.
The deciding factor: The evidence showed extensive leakage and fairly frequent involuntary bowel movements throughout the period on appeal, warranting a 60% rating. However, there was no evidence of complete loss of sphincter control for any portion of the appeal period.
- Claimed conditions
- rectal incontinence, residuals of prostate cancer with status post radical prostatectomy
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- 60%
- Decision date
- September 26, 2023
- Citation
- 23053484
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 23053484.
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.
- 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.