BVA Case 23-4291: Ptsd

Real Board of Veterans' Appeals decision · December 30,2024 · JAQUITH, Judge

Outcome
Vacated / Remanded
Decision Date
December 30,2024
Judge
JAQUITH, Judge
Service Era
Not specified

Conditions Claimed

PtsdDepressionAnxietyBackHipHeartTdiu

Issues on Appeal

Service ConnectionTdiuIncreased RatingPtsd

Why It Was Decided This Way

The Board found that [t]he [v]eteran's PTSD more nearly approximated occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity, and the Board noted that his symptoms included anxiety, chronic sleep impairment,disturbances of motivation and mood,and difficulty establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships.

The Board found that the veteran's PTSD did not cause occupational and social impairment with deficiencies in most areas,did not cause total occupational and social impairment,and did not preclude him from securing or following a substantially gainful occupation.

The Board found that the VA medical examiners throughout the period in question were in consensus that the [v]eteran's PTSD [wa]s productive of occupational and social impairment with reduced productivity.

The Board noted that the credible evidence demonstrated symptoms warranting a 30%rating (i.

The Board acknowledged that the veteran also displayed symptoms that were not specifically listed in the diagnostic criteria,including hypervigilance, feelings of tension and inability to relax, impaired concentration,and an exaggerated startle response,which the Board found more closely approximated the symptoms associated with a 30%rating.

In comparing the VA medical records and opinions with the private medical opinions,the Board noted that the March 2013 opinion by L.

The Board found that the 2019 private opinions had less probative value than the VA examinations from 2020 because the private opinions were not supported by adequate rationale and the physicians did not explain why their findings differed from the rest of the medical record.

The Board acknowledged evidence of flare-ups from the 2013 and 2019 private opinions, but the Board found that the veteran's condition remained largely consistent and warranted a 6 The Board erroneously denotes Dr.

Authorities Cited

Bankhead v. ShulkinCalma v. BrownCaluza v. BrownDolbin v. McFletcher v. DerwinskiForeman v. ShulkinGilbert v. DerwinskiGleicher v. DerwinskiHatlestad v. BrownHersey v. DerwinskiKahana v. ShinsekiLoach v. ShinsekiMahl v. PrincipiMittleider v. WestRay v. WilkieRice v. ShinsekiSee Allday v. BrownSee Andrews v. McSee Hensley v. WestSee Smallwood v. BrownSee Tucker v. West

Denial Type

Credibility|Rating Criteria

Find Similar Precedent for Your Claim

VetAid's analyzer maps your claim against thousands of real Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions like this one — surfacing the exact case law that supports your arguments.

Run my claim through VetAid →