Jump to content



Search



Toggle shoutbox Shoutbox Open the Shoutbox in a popup

@  arng11 : (26 November 2014 - 11:30 AM) Everyone Enjoy The Holidays And Be Safe.
@  eagle1012004 : (26 November 2014 - 10:10 AM) Have A Happy Thanksgiving All!!!
@  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.

Photo
- - - - -

Depression Secondary To Shoulder


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
No replies to this topic

#1 allan

 
allan

    Content Contributor

  • HadIt.com Elder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13030 posts
 

Posted 05 June 2009 - 12:07 AM

Citation NR: 9615910 Decision Date: 06/06/96 Archive Date: 06/18/96DOCKET NO. 95-36 296 ) DATE ) )On appeal from theDepartment of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in New York, New YorkTHE ISSUEEntitlement to service connection for a psychiatric disability, secondary to a service connected right shoulder disability.REPRESENTATIONAppellant represented by: Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United StatesWITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEALAppellantATTORNEY FOR THE BOARDK. Johnson, Associate CounselINTRODUCTIONThe veteran served on active duty from August 1976 to February 1978.This matter initially came to the Board of Veteransí Appeals (Board) from an August 1993 decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in St. Petersburg, Florida, which denied service connection for depression secondary to the veteranís service-connected right shoulder disability. Although the RO in St. Petersburg, Florida made the initial determination, in February 1994, the veteranís claims folder and claims were transferred to the RO in New York, New York, based on the veteranís change of residence. The Board also notes that the veteran has raised the issue that his depression, claimed to be secondary to his service-connected right shoulder disability, has rendered him unemployable, and has filed an unemployability claim. The issue of veteranís entitlement to unemployability benefits based on service connection for depression secondary to his service-connected right shoulder disability is not inextricably intertwined with the current appeal, and the RO has made no determination regarding the unemployability claim. Therefore, it is referred to the RO for the appropriate action. REMANDIn 1977, during service, the veteran sustained an injury to his right shoulder, and underwent surgery. In 1988, the veteran underwent another surgical procedure to improve his shoulder mobility. Since that time, however, the veteran has experienced residual pain and loss of range of motion. In February 1988, the veteran was granted service connection for his right shoulder disability. An April 1988 VA medical report noted that the veteran was hospitalized after an attempted suicide, and was given a diagnosis of adjustment disorder, with depressed mood. In July 1988, the veteran was afforded a personal hearing regarding his service-connected right shoulder disability, and raised the issue that his depression was related to his shoulder surgery. He testified that he had been under the care of psychiatrist.An August 1988 VA examination for rating purposes noted that the veteran had been suffering from depression. The physician who conducted the physical examination, reported that the veteran had a status post reactive depressive personality disorder, maybe related to his continuous pain and limited mobility of the right shoulder. The psychiatric examiner noted the veteranís reporting of several months of intermittent dysphoric periods associated with stressors, including bills coming due, the inability to work due to his right shoulder disability and pain, car troubles, and not adequately providing for his family. The examiner noted that all of those social circumstances combined to produce intermittent periods of dysphoria. The examiner gave a diagnosis of continuous alcohol abuse, adjustment disorder with work inhibition and the presence of depressive features. This is the last VA examination of record that included a psychiatric evaluation.A January 1989 VA examination report noted that the veteran had chronic pain syndrome. It was also noted that there was a 15 year history of chronic ethanol abuse, and a history of adjustment reaction with depressive state. A February 1989 VA medical report noted a diagnosis of chronic pain syndrome of the right shoulder, and reported that there was the possibility of the associated depression bearing on the pain syndrome. Private physician reports, dated from June 1992 to August 1992, noted the veteranís medical history regarding his right shoulder and chronic pain. The reports noted diagnoses of depression and anxiety, and the August 1992 report noted a diagnosis of recurrent depression with delusions. VA outpatient treatment reports also note that the veteran continued to seek treatment for his depression and anxiety. In view of the need for an evaluation which clearly defines the nature and onset of the veteranís depression and anxiety, and since the last VA psychiatric evaluation was conducted in 1988, the Board has determined that, the veteran should be afforded a VA psychiatric examination. The claims folder should be made available to the examiner prior to such examination. In view of the foregoing, and in order to fully and fairly evaluate the veteranís claim, the case is REMANDED to the RO for the following development:1. The RO should obtain the treatment records from all VA and non-VA medical care providers, which are not currently associated with the veteranís claims file. After securing the necessary release for any private records, the RO should obtain these records, and associate them with the veteranís claims file.2. The RO should schedule the veteran for a VA psychiatric examination. The claims folder should be made available to the examiner for review prior to the examination. The examiner should give a diagnosis of each psychiatric disorder that is present. For each disorder that is present, the examiner should state a medical opinion, based on the entire medical record, as to whether it is more likely than not that the disorder is the result of the service-connected right shoulder disability.3. The RO should readjudicate the veteranís claim for service connection for a psychiatric disability, secondary to the service-connected right shoulder disability. If the determination remains adverse to the veteran, he should be provided a supplemental statement of the case which includes a summary of additional evidence submitted, any additional applicable laws and regulations, and the reasons for the decision. The veteran and his representative should be afforded the applicable time to respond.Thereafter, subject to current appellate procedures, the case should be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration, if appropriate. The veteran need take no action until he is further informed. The purpose of this REMAND is to obtain additional information and to afford the veteran due process of law. The Board intimates no opinion, either factual or legal, as to the ultimate conclusion warranted in this case. G. H. SHUFELT Member, Board of Veterans' AppealsThe Board of Veterans' Appeals Administrative Procedures Improvement Act, Pub. L. No. 103-271, ß 6, 108 Stat. 740, 741 (1994), permits a proceeding instituted before the Board to be assigned to an individual member of the Board for a determination. This proceeding has been assigned to an individual member of the Board.Under 38 U.S.C.A. ß 7252 (West 1991), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Veterans Appeals. This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal. 38 C.F.R. ß 20.1100(b) (1995).- 2 -