The Board denied the Veteran's claim for special monthly compensation (SMC) based on aid and attendance, finding that he does not meet the criteria due to his service-connected disabilities.
The deciding factor: The evidence of record did not show that the Veteran was in need of regular aid and attendance due to his service-connected disabilities.
- Claimed conditions
- Coronary artery disease, Residuals of prostate cancer status post radical prostatectomy, Chronic kidney disease associated with diabetes mellitus type II with non-proliferative retinopathy both eyes, Right upper extremity diabetic peripheral neuropathy associated with diabetes mellitus type II with non-proliferative retinopathy both eyes, Left upper extremity diabetic peripheral neuropathy associated with diabetes mellitus type II with non-proliferative retinopathy both eyes, Diabetes mellitus type II with non-proliferative retinopathy both eyes, Left lower extremity diabetic neuropathy sciatic nerve associated with diabetes mellitus type II with non-proliferative retinopathy both eyes, Left lower extremity diabetic neuropathy femoral nerve associated with diabetes mellitus type II with non-proliferative retinopathy both eyes, Right lower extremity diabetic neuropathy femoral nerve associated with diabetes mellitus type II with non-proliferative retinopathy both eyes, Painful heart scar associated with coronary artery disease status post bypass grafting, Tinnitus, Pulmonary nodules, Erectile dysfunction associated with residuals of prostate cancer status post radical prostatectomy, Heart scar associated with coronary artery disease status post bypass grafting, Bilateral hearing loss
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- April 17, 2025
- Citation
- A25035421
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 bilateral hearing loss, as there was no evidence of a current disability in the right ear and insufficient evidence to establish a nexus between the left ear hearing loss and service.
- Granted
The Board granted service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding that the Veteran's conditions are related to in-service noise exposure.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board remands the matter for a medical clarification regarding whether the Veteran's service-connected epilepsy has aggravated his bilateral hearing loss.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board remands the claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss to obtain an addendum opinion addressing the Veteran's lay statements regarding in-service acoustic trauma and a rocket blast injury.
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.