Jump to content



Search



Toggle shoutbox Shoutbox Open the Shoutbox in a popup

@  Tbird : (22 November 2014 - 04:54 PM) Tbird Accepted To 2015 Conference: V-Wise: Another Entrepreneurship Project Of The Whitman School Of Management Http://ow.ly/ej9Qg
@  Tbird : (22 November 2014 - 04:13 PM) Arng11 Thank You For Your Contribution To Our Funding Campaign.
@  britton : (22 November 2014 - 02:57 PM) Thank You Ms T For Starting This Web Site For All Veterans, You Helpd Me And My Family And I'll Be Forever Gratful To You & Hadit.com
@  Tbird : (22 November 2014 - 08:19 AM) Thank You All For Helping With The Funding The Site. It Is Really Helping!
@  Tbird : (22 November 2014 - 08:18 AM) Britton Pm Me And I. Can Check This Out For You
@  britton : (22 November 2014 - 06:44 AM) What Does ''you Missed Your Quota For Postives Votes Today'' Mean??
@  coriemboh : (19 November 2014 - 08:29 AM) Hold Time For Peggy Was Approximately 1 Minute. That Was 17 Minutes Ago. They Really Need To Change This Hold Music.
@  Tbird : (17 November 2014 - 02:42 PM) Stretch Thanks For The Extra Contribution To Our Fundraiser This Month.
@  maxwell18 : (16 November 2014 - 09:04 PM) I Still Have To Bitch About The Navy Hosp Cutting My Meds By 2/3 On My Norco. I Contacted Customer Service Or What Ever You Want To Call It Who In Turn Contacted The Navy Hosp Pensacola Commander Who In Turn Did Nothing. Thanks To All The People That Are Affair Of There Jobs And I Feel That Medical Malpractice Should Come Into Place. I Guess Just Do What Ever They Want To Because They Can, But Don't Give A Sh T For The Vets That Suppose To Being Supporting From All The Military  organizations. This Is Not The Way They Have Been Trained And Promised To Do. 
@  carlie : (16 November 2014 - 11:26 AM) Delayed Onset Tinnitus - Ref To Va Training Letter 10-028 - Link - Http://veteranclaims.wordpress.com/2014/05/06/single-Judge-Application-Va-Training-Letter-10-028-Delayed-Onset-Tinnitus/
@  carlie : (16 November 2014 - 11:03 AM) Here's A Good Tinnitus Link To Check Out From M21-1 Change Dated Jan 10,2014 - Http://veteranclaims.wordpress.com/tag/section-B-Duty-Military-Occupational-Specialty-Mos-Noise-Exposure-Listing-Fast-Letter-10-35-Tinnitus-Hearing-Loss-Vbms-Rating-Decision-Tools/
@  Asiadaug : (16 November 2014 - 02:08 AM) "rolled" Not Ruled! :)
@  Asiadaug : (16 November 2014 - 02:07 AM) Thanks. I Have Seen The Fast Ltr 10-35 And Have Seen Cases Where The Va Has Apparently Agreed That Tinnitus Can Have Delayed Onset. I Did Not In Looking Over The Fast Ltr See Where They Had Ruled 10-028 Into That. And, I Am Not Sure In The Vas Issuance Of ‘policy’ Type Letters How They Might Roll In Previous Instructions Into Newer Ones. Maybe There Is Some Intranet Traceability Capability? I Was Just Curious As There ‘appeared’ To Be Conspicuous Absence Of That 10-028. I Am Assuming 10-028 Was Written In 2010. But It May Be I Should Not Assume Anything.
@  carlie : (15 November 2014 - 05:56 PM) Asiadaug - You Might Be Looking For Fast Letter 10-35, Http://www.hadit.com/forums/topic/40962-Va-Fl-10-35/ Also Check Out This Link To Links For Delayed Onset Tinnitus - They All Refer Back To Fast Letter 10-35, Https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=Chrome-Instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=Utf-8#q=Tinnitus, Delayed Onset, Va Fast Letter
@  Tbird : (15 November 2014 - 07:50 AM) Asiadaug Searched All Over For Va Training Letter 10-028 But No Luck So Far.
@  Asiadaug : (15 November 2014 - 02:12 AM) Several Cases I've Run Across Mention Va Training Letter 10-028 With Apparent Discussion About Delayed Onset Of Tinnitus. I Have Been Unable To Locate That Trng Ltr. Any Suggestions?
@  Tbird : (12 November 2014 - 05:56 PM) Stretch Thanks For Contributing To Our Fundraising Campairg
@  Tbird : (12 November 2014 - 04:01 AM) Atomicwidow Thank Your For Donating To Our Funding Campaign.
@  Tbird : (11 November 2014 - 07:00 AM) Veterans Day 2014 - Veterans Thank You For Your Service And Your Sacrifice.
@  Tbird : (10 November 2014 - 07:19 AM) Semper Fi Marines

Photo

Gaf Score


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
10 replies to this topic

#1 peb1

 
peb1

    E-3 Seaman

  • Seaman
  • PipPipPip
  • 16 posts
 

Posted 02 November 2008 - 01:20 PM

GAF score of 43 ,,,, SSD approved August 2008 claim for PTSD , and other mental illnesses.... will the SSD help my claim? thanks.....

#2 Pete53

 
Pete53

    Moderator/HadIt.com Elder

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21895 posts
 

Posted 02 November 2008 - 01:39 PM

Yes it will make sure the VARO has a copy of your SSD award letter ASAP.

#3 mobie16r

 
mobie16r

    E-6 Petty Officer 1st Class

  • Senior Chief Petty Officer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 384 posts
 

Posted 07 November 2008 - 01:50 PM

peb1,(1)if you got a vertifiable inservice stressor(2) You been diagnose with Post-traumatic stress disorder.(3)your vertifiable stressor is the reason you have ptsd.You will be granted a rating.I see you been diagnose with ptsd,you have meet the first reguirement.A gaf score of 43 is very serious,but va take more into consideration when giving a rating,but your SSD will play a big part in getting a higher rating if it is all mental.
mobie

#4 jbasser

 
jbasser

    Moderator/HadIt.com Elder/SVR Radio Panelist

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6282 posts
 

Posted 07 November 2008 - 03:45 PM

Take a look at this stressor will you.
http://www.liveleak....=6a4_1172869037
Member was on the Flight deck when this occurred.

#5 Pete53

 
Pete53

    Moderator/HadIt.com Elder

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21895 posts
 

Posted 08 November 2008 - 07:53 AM

jbasser that would be a slam dunk. I guess they let that pilot try to soon. I wonder why they did not wave him off?

#6 jbasser

 
jbasser

    Moderator/HadIt.com Elder/SVR Radio Panelist

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6282 posts
 

Posted 08 November 2008 - 09:26 AM

They did a wave off but t he pilot ws new. Instead of using the rudder the pilot inverted the plane and slammed into the tower.
One of our members was actually on the flight deck working a catapult when this occurred.

Ironically this pilot's younger brother also went into the Navy and was killed 9-11-01 while working at the Pentagon.

J

#7 ltate90

 
ltate90

    E-5 Petty Officer 2nd Class

  • Second Class Petty Officers
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 92 posts
 

Posted 12 November 2008 - 11:45 AM

PEB1,
WAS PTSD YOUR ONLY THING THAT YOU GOT APPROVED FOR. I SEE YOU HAD A GAF SCORE OF 43, DID YOU HAVE A LAWYER PRESENT? AND WAS YOUR GAF SCORE A MAJOR FACTOR IN YOUR SSDI APPROVAL.

#8 Pete53

 
Pete53

    Moderator/HadIt.com Elder

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21895 posts
 

Posted 12 November 2008 - 04:23 PM

GAF is only an estimate and some here are putting to much empathizes on GAF/ Personally your medical history and doc opinions are probably the most important. Just my opinion.

If the VA won't give you a rating you really need a MF to help your claim.

The raters think that they can make Medical Opinions until they are called out on it.

#9 Andrew

 
Andrew

    E-2 Recruit

  • Seaman
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
 

Posted 15 May 2009 - 08:01 PM

GAF score of 43 ,,,, SSD approved August 2008 claim for PTSD , and other mental illnesses.... will the SSD help my claim? thanks.....


I am replying to this somewhat dated post to add my view of the state of the law. First, there are two parts to a VA decision -- 1. Does the disability exist and, if so, how bad is it; and 2. Was the disability incurred in, caused by, or aggravated by either military service or treatment at a VA facility? So even is the Social Security Administration determines you are disabled, you must establish the nexus between the disability and your military service. If this is a PTSD case and you had a rough childhood or other possible stressors, VA may try to point to those stressors as the cause of your disability. If they do, request reconsideration and tell them that it is as likely as not that the illness was caused by the in-service stressor and, in the alternative, if you suffered trauma before the service, you were fully functional upon entry and so military service activated and aggravated the disability.

Second, a decision by the Social Security Administration should be accorded "substantial deference" by the VA adjudicator. While the VA adjudicator is not bound by that decision, federal agencies should give the decision of another federal agency great weight. If VA disregards that SSA decision, it must give some reason why. Here's some language you may want to add to your cover letter when you write about your claim to VA. (There's more language that follows this, too, further below.)

The Social Security Administration has recently determined that I am too disabled to work because of my service-connected (name the disability). As such, they have found me eligible for Title II Social Security Disability Benefits. Please see the enclosed decision of the Social Security Administration. While the VA is not bound by the Social Security Administration's decision, it must consider it. See, e.g., DeLoatche v. Heckler, 715 F.2d 148, 150 (4th Cir. 1983). The Court in DeLoatche considered Social Security's failure to consider such a disability determination to be an "egregious" defect in its decision. And in McCartey v. Massanari, 298 F.3d 1072, 1076 (9th Cir. 2002), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit stated:

We agree with the approach of the Fourth, Fifth, and Eleventh Circuits and hold that in an SSD case an ALJ must ordinarily give great weight to a VA determination of disability. See Chambliss, 269 F.3d at 522, Brady, 724 F.2d at 921; DeLoatche, 715 F.2d at 150 n.1. We so conclude because of the marked similarity between these two federal disability programs. Both programs serve the same governmental purpose--providing benefits to those unable to work because of a serious disability. Both programs evaluate a claimant's ability to perform full-time work in the national economy on a sustained and continuing basis; both focus on analyzing a claimant's functional limitations; and both require claimants to present extensive medical documentation in support of their claims. Compare 38 C.F.R. 4.1 et seq. (VA ratings) with 20 C.F.R. 404.1 et seq. (Social Security Disability). Both programs have a detailed regulatory scheme that promotes consistency in adjudication of claims. Both are administered by the federal government, and they share a common incentive to weed out meritless claims. The VA criteria for evaluating disability are very specific and translate easily into SSA's disability framework. Because the VA and SSA criteria for determining disability are not identical, however, the ALJ may give less weight to a VA disability rating if he gives persuasive, specific, valid reasons for doing so that are supported by the record. See Chambliss, 269 F.3d at 522 (ALJ need not give great weight to a VA rating if he "adequately explain[s] the valid reasons for not doing so").

Just as SSA must give great weight to VA decisions, so too must VA give great weight to SSA decisions.

-------

In addition, send a letter to the VARO with the following language:

The Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA or Act, Pub. L. No. 106-475, 114 Stat. 2096) requires the VA to notify all claimants of "any information, and any medical or lay evidence, not previously provided to the Secretary that is necessary to substantiate the claim." If you believe VA still lacks sufficient evidence to substantiate my claim, please tell me precisely what evidence is still lacking.

In some instances, there may be positive and negative evidence in the VA record. If you determine there is negative evidence in my record, please let me know what this evidence is, and please let me know what types of evidence would tend to rebut this negative evidence and thus substantiate my claim.

Even if VA does not answer your letter in an appropriate manner, it will be to your benefit later if you do not prevail on your claim. Please, please, please do not send the VA original documents. Always maintain your own copies in chronological order. And do send everything US Postal Service certified mail with delivery confirmation and return receipt requested so someone must sign for it.

GOOD LUCK!








#10 Pete53

 
Pete53

    Moderator/HadIt.com Elder

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21895 posts
 

Posted 16 May 2009 - 12:51 AM

Nice Post Andrew

#11 jsdwd

 
jsdwd

    E-5 Petty Officer 2nd Class

  • First Class Petty Officer
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 109 posts
 

Posted 19 May 2009 - 11:37 AM

[quote name='Andrew' date='May 15 2009, 09:01 PM' post='145210']
[font="Arial"][size=2]


Great post Andrew.

I did send documents (not originals) to the RO via certified mail, return receipt, and can establish that they did receive them.

When I had my C & P exam, the documents were not in the file. I had brought copies to the exam just in case and gave them to the examiner. The examiner placed them in the file and mentioned them in her report (which was nice of her), but I still don't know if they are 'officially' in my file. My file has been sent to a different RO (in a different state) for rating so I can't go and request to see it. Phone calls to the 800 number get the response that the person cannot tell (based on what they are looking at on their computer) whether or not the documents are in the file. But I have the return receipt cards, so if the documents are not considered, a request for reconsideration should be doable based on that alone.

Good luck.