Jump to content



Search



Toggle shoutbox Shoutbox Open the Shoutbox in a popup

@  Tbird : (28 November 2014 - 11:03 AM) Thank You Britton That Means A Lot To Me!
@  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

Photo

Nexus Statement For Ptsd - Triggers


This topic has been archived.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

#1 annahonda

 
annahonda

    E-3 Seaman

  • Seaman
  • PipPipPip
  • 8 posts
 

Posted 09 January 2011 - 04:02 PM

Hi everyone,

First of all I want to thank you for all the information I get from this site. My question is about the needed nexus statement for a PTSD claim. I recently had a C and P exam and the closest thing to a Nexus was the last paragraph.

RECOMMENDATIONS:
"After reading the C-Folder , the electronic medical records and the medical literature it is reasonable to conclude that the veterans allegations of manifesting PTSD as a result of sexual abuse(victim) are considered credible and the PTSD in question is fully linked to the service. The conclusions of these reports are based purely on the veterans allegations. This examiner does not have independent verifiable information as the veteran never reported the incident."

I have read through the forum that a nexus must read 'as likely as not" or "more than likely". Does this mean that I will still need to get a Nexus statement from another source?

#2 annahonda

 
annahonda

    E-3 Seaman

  • Seaman
  • PipPipPip
  • 8 posts
 

Posted 09 January 2011 - 05:53 PM

Warning Possible ......TRIGGERS....

One other thing that I noticed when I reread the entire C and P Exam was this paragraph:

"The veteran stated doing well until about 1985 when she was stationed in Germany, specifically at Stuttgart and another serviceman that she does not know the name of she can only describe him as a AA/NA male who, more than likely than not, was at the rank of E-5 -raped her "

My question is the more than likely than not the fact that his rank was E-5, or the fact of the rape..? Which is more likely than not?

#3 carlie

 
carlie

    Moderator/Admin/HadIt.com Elder/SVR Radio Panelist

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22280 posts
 

Posted 09 January 2011 - 06:39 PM

Warning Possible ......TRIGGERS....

One other thing that I noticed when I reread the entire C and P Exam was this paragraph:

"The veteran stated doing well until about 1985 when she was stationed in Germany, specifically at Stuttgart and another serviceman that she does not know the name of she can only describe him as a AA/NA male who, more than likely than not, was at the rank of E-5 -raped her "

My question is the more than likely than not the fact that his rank was E-5, or the fact of the rape..? Which is more likely than not?


annahonda,
Welcome to Hadit.com .
The "more likely than not" will need to be viewed by the decision maker
as relating to the rape (MST) and not the rank of the perpetrator, in order
to help grant SC.




In regards to,
"
RECOMMENDATIONS:
"After reading the C-Folder , the electronic medical records and the medical literature it is reasonable to conclude that the veterans allegations of

manifesting PTSD as a result of sexual abuse(victim) are considered credible and the PTSD in question is fully linked to the service."
THIS PART ABOVE IS GOOD FOR YOUR CLAIM TO SC PTSD
BUT - then the examiner mucks it up with the part below,
"The conclusions of these reports are based purely on the veterans allegations.
This examiner does not have independent verifiable information as the veteran never reported the incident."


Does anything in your C-Folder, the electronic medical records or the medical literature, of record
support that the event occurred ?



#4 annahonda

 
annahonda

    E-3 Seaman

  • Seaman
  • PipPipPip
  • 8 posts
 

Posted 09 January 2011 - 06:56 PM

I did submit alternative evidence on form 21-0781a.

Some of the things included medical reports four months ofter the incident showing suicidal ideations, and depression.

My security clearance was suspended do to work performance.

I have a statement from a roommate in the barracks who I told about the incident, she provided a statement and I have family statements noting changes they saw after the incident.

But I was seen for depression several times during the Army.

#5 annahonda

 
annahonda

    E-3 Seaman

  • Seaman
  • PipPipPip
  • 8 posts
 

Posted 09 January 2011 - 11:07 PM

Another thought, If the VA conceded my stressor, could this statement be classified as a "Nexus" ?

"PTSD in question is fully linked to the service"

#6 Berta

 
Berta

    HadIt.com Elder/SVR Radio Panelist

  • SVR
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 29055 posts
 

Posted 10 January 2011 - 08:56 AM

That would certainly be a favorable nexus statement from the doctor. However it doesn't end with that.

This is a recent remand for a MST claim and the BVA refers to
VBA Fast letter No. 10-25 (July 15, 2010) in the remand. That fast letter should be here under our Fast Letter topic-if not I will find link and post it.It involves how the VA is supposed to handle MST claims.

As you can see the claim diagnosis was re -charaterized in this recent decision:

The diagnosis in this case doesn't matter as much as the evidence.
http://www4.va.gov/v...es3/1028680.txt

Do you have copies of your SMRs and your 201 file?

#7 Berta

 
Berta

    HadIt.com Elder/SVR Radio Panelist

  • SVR
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 29055 posts
 

Posted 10 January 2011 - 08:59 AM

Thanks to Tbird and Fantasticbooks I found it right away in our Fast Letter forum:

http://www.hadit.com...68-va-fl-10-25/

#8 annahonda

 
annahonda

    E-3 Seaman

  • Seaman
  • PipPipPip
  • 8 posts
 

Posted 10 January 2011 - 12:44 PM

I'm not sure how this will help me. The MST was 20 years ago, and was not reported.

#9 Berta

 
Berta

    HadIt.com Elder/SVR Radio Panelist

  • SVR
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 29055 posts
 

Posted 13 January 2011 - 08:21 AM

PTSD claims need verified proof of a stressor.

Do you have a vet rep holding your POA?

#10 Berta

 
Berta

    HadIt.com Elder/SVR Radio Panelist

  • SVR
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 29055 posts
 

Posted 13 January 2011 - 08:30 AM

To add -= this case
http://www4.va.gov/v...es2/1014689.txt

and others at the BVA web site (google the VA main site, then go to the BVA decision search page)

reveal what VA looks for as evidence in these types of claims.You do have evidence that your work performance deteriorated after this event.VA considers that evidence.

You also have "medical reports four months ofter the incident showing suicidal ideations, and depression."

Did you mention depression as well as PTSD in your claim?

Did the inservice medical reports state that your depression and/or suicidal ideation was due to the sexual assault?

Do you have those records (in copy of your SMRs)and have you submitted them to the VA?

Or has VA obtained those records by now?

During the 20 years since this event have you had any private therapy or treatment for depression or PTSD?

If so is VA aware of those private records?

Edited by Berta, 13 January 2011 - 08:31 AM.


#11 annahonda

 
annahonda

    E-3 Seaman

  • Seaman
  • PipPipPip
  • 8 posts
 

Posted 13 January 2011 - 09:41 AM

Thanks for all the help first of all, yes a have the DAV holding my POA.

I did mention depression and anxiety secondary to PTSD in my claim.

No, the inservice medical reports did not state that the depression/or suicidal ideation was due to the sexual assault. I was too ashamed and blamed it on a familly members death at the time.

I do have copies of the medical records showing the trip to the emergency room for the depression /or suicidal ideation and it was submitted with the claim and the VA,

I have recently had private therapy and was diagnosed by the VA for PTSD. I have been in once a week treatment through the VA for PTSD.

I forwarded the private treatment records and the VA treatment records to the VA.

I do not have a Nexus statement stating "more likely than not", the only thing close to a Nexus is the statement made by the examiner during my C and P exam. "After reading the C-Folder, the electronic medical records and the medical literature it is reasonable to conclude that the veterans allegations of manifesting PTSD as a result of sexual abuse are considered credible and the PTSD in question is fully linked to the service. The conclusions of these reports are based purely on the veterans allegations. This examiner does not have independent verifiable information as the veteran never reported the incident."

I am ot sure if I am still able to get an Independent Medical Opinion or Examination done since the new PTSD regs changed, my claim was filed in May 2010. My VA therapist says she cannot write nexus reports. i will if you think this would help my claim.

So that is what I have: 1-VA diagnosis of PTSD 2-What I feel is strong alternative evidence(what the VA thinks is another story) 3-A possible Nexus statement from a VA C and P examiner if my Stressor is conceded.

And DAV helped me with absolutely none of this.

#12 Berta

 
Berta

    HadIt.com Elder/SVR Radio Panelist

  • SVR
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 29055 posts
 

Posted 13 January 2011 - 10:28 AM

The new PTSD rules do NOT allow the VA to even consider an IMO.

It is grossly unfair.

The new rules are in this topic.

#13 Berta

 
Berta

    HadIt.com Elder/SVR Radio Panelist

  • SVR
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 29055 posts
 

Posted 13 January 2011 - 10:30 AM

The new PTSD rules (which have been challenged in court) are here:

http://www.hadit.com...ules-new-topic/