CUE and More CUE

My son was home recently and allowed me to stroll through his access port to WestLaw. This is a legal site one subscribes to. Access is limited to those who pay. As he is a law student, he is given this access. As I am his father and paying for his education, I, too, get some access when he is here. Thus I asked him to download this   as I am always looking for new windows to view CUE through. It is one of the more complicated venues to revise a prior decision but is a minefield of codicils on what is or isn’t permitted. There are numerous “Yes, but not if….” regulations that confuse Vets.

I add this here for those of you who are legally inclined. It is a wonderful compendium of legal opinions from SCOTUS down to the CAVC- all precedental of course. Some of the links may be defective but can easily by found by googling them. What is important is in knowing which precedental case controls which facet of the suspected CUE. Obviously, duty to assist (or the failure to) will be found in Cook v. Principi (US). Oddly, there are narrow grounds to win there in spite of what Caffrey holds.

Notes on CUE Reg

Posted in CUE, Veterans Law | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Marine Wounded Warriors Battalion

Camp Lejeune  is back in the news again and this time it’s not because of something in the water. I always worry about public appearances and perceptions of Veterans where they are used as poster material.

When we came home from Vietnam, we were hustled to the back of the bus and seated next to the Rosa Parks of life. America couldn’t wait to put it behind them and move on. Veterans were anathema and the military industrial complex was held in even less esteem. One can say we’ve come a long way, baby. I suppose when America was attacked as it clearly was in 2001, it provoked a strong patriotic response. That may be the reason we have tolerated the current wars and their ensuing loss of human life for as long as we have.

Vietnam, in the memory of Americans, lasted from 1965 to 1970 from a combat perspective. In truth, it began in 1955 when the French bailed out of Dien Bien Phu  and tactically advanced west on Route 7 in a new direction (Vientiane, Laos). America’s military, hoping to try out all their new military hardware, showed up to survey the damage. Eisenhower was well aware of the coming cold war and the advance of Communism.  Our overseas foreign policy then was intrusive like Big Brother. Citizens tolerated this until social consciousness awakened and the casualties became too excessive. In terms of time, it can be said that we were “in there” far longer than the current conflict in southwest Asia. Our current casualties are not nearly as horrific as the 58,000 + in that prior conflict.

We have now been actively engaged in SWA  for twelve years and our citizenry supports the troops but the will is waning for the actual support of our mission there. One can say it’s hard to muster support when our allies are busy shooting us in the back and strapping on explosive vests to commit hari kiri in our midst. It gives the impression that somehow we are now a fifth wheel and unwanted. We haven’t helped ourselves with some of our actions there but I submit they pale in comparison to our excesses in Vietnam.

Be that as it may, the issue that provoked this diatribe was an article I spotted in  the newspaper yesterday morning. A small column entitled News of the Weird stated this:

The Marine Wounded Warrior Battalion at Camp Lejeune, N.C. generally enjoys excellent support from the community, but in an April report to the Government Accountability Office, Marines complained of a “petting zoo” environment in which civilian charities and advertisers use the battalion to seek out “poster faces” and bodies that “looked the part” of wounded Veterans, such as those severely burned or missing limbs. Warriors who suffer PTSD or TBI often appear outwardly “normal” and are likely to be ignored by the support organization, thus setting a “bad tone” among the wounded.

Some of you might be inclined to say how terrible this is.  Why, everyone should get top billing as an equal opportunity casualty. Others might roll their eyes and say what is the world coming to when the wounded start demanding equal face time before the press. I may have only scratched the surface on what various public opinions are of this but it is demeaning. Demeaning to Vets and to Americans. Does a newspaper article have to point this out?

No Vet, be he/she a peacetime, Korean War, Vietnam, wheelchair-bound, PTSD -afflicted, SWA  or any other, should be shopped around for the perfect photo op. Many of our scars are invisible and no single one is more deserving of attention to the exclusion of others. The media loves to shock us with graphic photographs of all manner of destruction. Veterans are now “in” and politicians love to use them to wave the flag. What could be finer than to have a Veteran minus a limb or two up on stage or on a poster asking for donations? How tacky. Not the Veterans. They have been hornswoggled and inveigled into this by promises of the beneficial effects it will have for their brothers. One may notice that they are never remunerated for these services either.

I do not know if this bothers other Veterans but one thing disturbs me. If you foolishly mentioned you were a Vet in 1973 when I got out, you wouldn’t get much more than a job driving a taxicab. Nowadays you get the handshake and that hollow “Thank you for your service” . Some may honestly express that sentiment to me but to most it is a rote response like saying “God bless you ” after a sneeze. This is why I never use the phrase or the other one  I hear frequently aimed at Vietnam Vets- “Welcome home!”  Where were all these Welcome Wagon gladhanders in the sixties and the seventies? Why has their attitude changed? Political correctness may be the salient reason.

We are going to see this camaraderie  fade soon when Afghanistan is no longer palatable to Americans. Enjoy it while it lasts ladies and gentlemen Vets. Congress, too, will inevitably be swayed and turn their financial backs on us when it suits them to do so. Mark my words. You’re only as good as your last war.

P.S. I prefer to express my admiration for fellow Veterans by thanking them for their unselfish support for America. Many hear the siren call. Few heed it and and make the ultimate sacrifice. Murphy’s First Law holds sway- No good deed goes unpunished.

Posted in All about Veterans, Complaints Department, Gulf War Issues, PTSD, vA news | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Fed. Cir.–Morris v. Shinseki–Psychiatric vs. Personality disorders

Here’s one that’s probably never going to be available on Kindle. Mr. Jack D.  Morris entered service July 31, 1964 and exited 2 months and 6 days later. Not exactly what you would call a commitment.  Don’t confuse this with the other Mr. Morris I wrote about in April. Justice never occurs that quickly.

Jack apparently discovered he wasn’t going to be all he could be in September. He and the military came to a mutual agreement that he would separate under good terms. and so they did. Fifteen months later (January 1966) he decided to file for a psychiatric disorder. It seems his drill Sargent had dissed him and this had caused a permanent mental disorder.

In May, because there was no backlog in 1966, he was afforded a speedy denial. Jack declined to file a NOD and thus his claimboat sank a year later. But in 1986 he decided to reopen this with a nice letter from his therapist. The RO determined that the new and material evidence-wasn’t. He smartly appealed this one up to the BVA. The Board panel (since they had 3 judges to a Board)  in February 1988 agreed with Jack that the RO had screwed up. The evidence was indeed new and material. The only problem was that it wasn’t enough to win his case so he lost yet again. Jack had sent in some new stuff while the Board had his appeal so they had to back up and reconsider the decision. That one fared no better, but Jack kept sending in new evidence monthly and  the Board finally gave him the coup de grace in June of 1990.

By now, Congress had enacted the new VJRA and Mr. Morris could avail himself of the new COVA. He snagged a remand from them in 1992 and kept breathing life into this puppy. The Board had to go find another shrink to decipher Jack, but they kept coming back to the same conclusion that what Jack had was a personality disorder-several orders of magnitude less than a full-blown psychiatric disability that was compensable. Finally in 1993, they decided he did have schizophrenia . The stumbling block was the 1988 decision. They were not going to grant back to that date. They felt he had not made his case prior to this decision.

Ever the paper hanger, Jack kept pestering them with the patented squeaky wheel syndrome I so love to advocate. I never meant it to be for something as petty as this, though. In an obvious effort to be done with this, the RO caved in and gave him an effective date of 1987 at a full ride of 100%. Baaaaaaaad idea, VA.

Jack could now smell the blood in the water. In 1996, after a long battle and new appeal, the Board denied his CUE claim for the 1966 decision. He didn’t appeal and I’m sure everyone down at Vermont Ave. NW breathed a little easier. But not for long.

In the fall of 2004, Jack was back. This time he was filing CUE on the 1988 Board decision saying they’d short-sheeted him by only looking at his SMRs and not giving him the presumption of soundness associated with the Bagby holding. This time the Board decided to move like molasses in hopes that he’d get preoccupied with gambling or religion. Not.  Four-count them-four long years later they announced that there was no CUE:

 In its September 12, 2008 decision, the Board denied Mr. Morris’s CUE claim. The Board began by noting the claim that Mr. Morris had presented in 1988. The Board pointed out that, at that time, Mr. Morris contended that, during active duty, he developed, and was treated for, an acquired psychiatric disability; that he was in sound condition when he entered the service; that he was harassed by a drill sergeant, which resulted in his development of a nervous disorder; and that, following separation from the service, his psychiatric problems continued. 2008 Board Decision at 9. Continuing, the Board noted that the 1988 Board had determined that the initial service medical records on file showed that any psychiatric symptoms present during service were acute and transitory and attributed to a personality disorder. Morris v. Shinseki 2012

Memorize that stock phrase. Acute and transitory is applied so frequently to whitewash vA decisions that it should be translated into Latin and affixed to the Great Seal Of The vA.

Mind you, here it was appropriate but it is used far too frequently to legitimate claims. The Board also addressed other contentions, but the gist of the denial was very well crafted. He had not made his case and he was now wasting vA’s and other Vets’ time with his perennial  claims for an EED.

He got another date with the CAVC and went up there with the exact same tired arguments in 2010. They were less than impressed and affirmed the BVA. Which brings us here to the 3rd Circus.

Why Kenneth Carpenter signed up for this is anyone’s guess. I know every dog must have his car ride hanging out the window, but the Jackster was out of gas on this and pissing into the wind. He literally didn’t have Jack S___ and must have known it.

I admire his perspicacity in the face of insurmountable odds, but a man’s gotta know his limitations as the cops say in San Francisco. Thus I won’t be surprised if the next thing will be an attempt to scale Mount SCOTUS. Good Luck, Mr. Morris. And perhaps when you’re done you’ll go home and let others attain some justice, too.

Meet Jack.

P.S. Look in your medical records. Any ailment or disease will end with NCNS or No comp./no seq. This stands for No Complications, No Sequelae and means acute and transitory. If it was a broken bone or back injury it will usually say WHNS. This is Well Healed, No Sequelae. If you find the word chronic anywhere, it’s not acute. If  these abbreviations are absent, then vA cannot make a post hoc rationalization that it was acute or transitory. Remember this when you review your denial and your SMRs.

Posted in Fed. Cir. & Supreme Ct., Frivolous Filings, Important CAVC/COVA Ruling, Veterans Law | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments

VHA–Innovative Delays

Imagine you’re member JM. You have some issues with a toasted knee in service in 2005. You’ve gone through all the vA hoopla to get in and be seen. You’re scheduled for a new MRI (back in March) for this June. Now vA calls up and says they’ve got a new, improved  program and your MRI has been cancelled. You must now see an Orthopedic surgeon first who can authorize this. The earliest opening for that appointment is in July. With any luck, JM will get in for his MRI (if Dr. Orthodude approves it), some time before Christmas.

My advice to you, JM is go out and try to run a 5K marathon the day before the Ortho appointment because if you can walk, they’ll say you’re good to go and give you some OTC Alleve. One other consideration would be to do the 5K fun run tomorrow and then show up at the VAMC in Urgent Care with the disability and make it more “emergent” as they are fond of saying.

Forewarned is forearmed. If this starts to happen to you, explain that knees and liverboxes wait for no man be he mortal or doctor. vA has always been fond of jerking our chain and I do not mean that to be unkind. The whole VHA system is inhabited by personnel who feel there’s no hurry and rush. If one didn’t know any better, he or she might think they were back in the service again and going on sick call-or trying to.

Posted in Complaints Department, General Messages, Medical News, vA news | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

BVA–DECISION MAILED

I checked the BVA website to see if there had been any progress on my appeal and discovered I no longer have appeals pending at the Board. Two decisions are to be announced tomorrow and one was decided a year ago on May 4th, 2011. As most know, the BVA releases all decisions on appeal simultaneously rather than piecemeal. The site says they are en route to my VAMC for “development”.

P.S. Update Thursday 0900. I called BVA and they have mailed the decision out already. I expect to receive it Saturday or early next week. I’l publish it here regardless of how ugly it might be. I’m an optimist so I believe it’ll be a win on all four counts-Back/hips 1989 CUE , HCV/PCT EED and Tinnitus EED from 1994. So what if I lose. That’s what the CAVC was invented for.

Posted in BvA and VARO CUE DECISIONS, BvA HCV decisions | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

SEARO & OAKRO closed to new claims.

I was told Tuesday by my VR&E counselor that the Seattle and OaklandVAROs  are no longer accepting new claims. All claims are being rerouted to Salt Lake City and other VAROs with less of a backlog. Brilliant. How about outsourcing them to a subcontractor? I guess that might put someone out of work if it was revealed that the civilian counterpart to a prestigious all-paper bureaucracy was more efficient, accurate and timely.

So if some of you discover you are getting your denials on Salt Lick City’s VARO literature, relax. It took about two months to send the records there Pony Express. And, I presume Vets understand SLC has it’s own backlog albeit not so long. Any NODs will have to still be routed through SEARO. It will be like a private Claims Management Center in another state-gee… just like the AMC, huh? Somebody probably got promoted for that one.

Posted in VA BACKLOG, vA news | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

How to stop a nightmare.

Member Cal sends us this bit of wisdom. For your viewing pleasure, see how to stop a nightmare and nip it in the bud.

People ask me why I include these vignettes in a HCV forum and I ask right back–“Do you know how depressing it is to be sick with a disease like this? It actually provokes depression as one of it side effects.” And that, ladies and gentlemen Vets, is why I do things like this.

Posted in Food for the soul, Humor | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Footlocker Beginnings.

360004091_lgBack in the beginning when I arrived in SEA, I saw the need for a weapon up country that actually worked as advertised. The .45 ACPs could do this but, as with all semi-autos, they became a casualty of red clay. It got into everything including the gas tanks on the aircraft and was the reason for more than one unscheduled engine shutdown.

On the other side of the fence, no one checked to see what you carried and whether it had approved ball ammunition. I had a choice of a .38 M&P, a FN Hi-Power or a S&W Mod 39 in 9mm.  I asked a sibling to send me this one with 500 rounds of 158-grain jacketed hollowpoints. It was purchased at an unknown San Francisco gun shop (back when such a thing existed) in early July 1970. I brought it home with me in 1972 under my fatigue shirt in its shoulder holster. Like all AirAm gunslingers, we notched the butt when a memorable event occurred.

Cost in 1970? $89.95 NIB with BankAmericard. Shoulder holster free with the purchase of 500 rounds of ammo. Footlocker value in 2012? Priceless.

Back in 1993 when you could take guns to school legally, my daughter took this for her high school history “show and tell”. I delivered it to the front office and they took it up to the classroom and gave it to her. She brought it home with her that afternoon in her backpack. The times they are a changing.

 

Posted in From the footlocker | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

ILP– What about the Greenhouse?

Into everyone’s life a little rain must fall. My VRE case worker and I-he who granted me the computer-had a meet and greet this morning. He declined my offer of coffee laced with hemlock. He quickly started circling the wagons when I broached the subject of a NOD and accompanying administrative review of the greenhouse  request in my May 2011 filing.

Mr. H has a propensity to quote the party line without supporting it with CFRs. This should come as no surprise to any of us. It’s ingrained in them. Thus, when queried if I could accept the program with the computer and still file a NOD, he started stuttering. This was not discussed earlier and dissatisfaction was not voiced at the time of denial. His desire was to get the documents signed and beat a hasty retreat. When queried on whether VA intended to include a $200 LexisNexis Veterans Benefits manual (digital-on disc), he said that was vocational material only supplied to VSOs. As my grant was for communication with the outside world, I had no “need” for it. Huh?

When denied last November, it was based on this being an avocational pursuit.  After a lengthy NOD, they approved it this April. The IT guy based his whole rationale for what he was providing me on this website. Therefore when Mr. H informed me that this wasn’t the reason for the grant, he felt very comfortable saying I had no need for vocational interests as I was unemployable.

That brought forth a vociferous explanation that only three people are legally entitled to advocate for a Vet other than himself. A VA approved lawyer, a VSO and another VETERAN are all equal to the task. He became more and more uncomfortable with the tenor of my plaint. When I reached the greenhouse matter, he became visibly upset. Since the two requests are stand alones, they are individually appealable. Much like a comp/pen claim, abandoning it and coming back later to reopen it will be immeasurably harder. When asked to confirm that acceptance of computer would in no way endanger a NOD for the greenhouse, he became evasive and started the “that all depends on what the meaning of “is” is”. I parsed it in several different manners and finally he acquiesced and allowed as it could be done this way but was underhanded and somewhat of a sneak attack.  The idea was to get this ILP thing under control and hear no more about it. Au contraire, ma cher. We have just begun.

I was in contact with another disabled Veteran who contributes to one of our sister Vet’s sites. I idly asked if he hadn’t received ILP benefits when the cat jumped out of the bag. Not only had he received benefits, VA had granted virtually all that he asked for. I cut and paste here:

What I found with the ILP is that in order to get approved for any specific product or service, I had to be able to define why I needed that product. If you have the ILP definition from the VA or CFR, it describes what areas (Needs) should be fullfilled.
Medical, assistive technology, avocational (hobbies) community involvement, recreational, and daily living activities .

They got the following items for me:
ADT Security system with 2 years of monitoring w/alert pendant
Food processor
Several cooking appliances like a small convection oven (we have a gas range, not so compatible with morphine) grill, and a couple other small things
Fishing gear (my Veteran buddies like taking me fishing a few times a year)
Cannon Rebel Camera with 2 nice lenses, backpack, tripod and training tools.
There are some other items as well, like an electric toothbrush and cleaning items. My hands are very arthritic and it is hard to use a manual toothbrush.
A Kindle with carrying case.
A very nice mattress and memory foam topper pad.
It took over 2 years to get 1 item, but once I started requesting items based on my individual disabilities, and some of those requests were backed up by my private physicians, then the IL case manager really started to help.
Took a lot of work, and a lot of research, but was well worth it in the end.

I researched some of this before Mr. H arrived and I was quick to point out why the ILP program existed and what Congress intended when they passed it in 1984. The VA has truncated it and tried to lock it in the attic like a mentally challenged sibling but the information continues to trickle out.

Our fellow Vet proves the largesse is far more forthcoming in Portland than Seattle. This was why I have decided to stand my ground. Using bait and switch to grant and then claim the computer is not to help Vets but to stay in contact with the outer world is disingenuous on their part. Thus no VBM from LexisNexis.

Congress intended this benefit to accrue to Vets whose disabilities were above and beyond those with minor disabilities. Mine precludes going out into sunlight no matter how thick the zinc oxide is slathered on. In winter, the cryoglobulinemia restricts my excursions outside due to the pain in the extremities. Due to the fact that dizziness from the phlebotomies and anemia weaken me every month, I am a captive in my own domain.

VA keeps reverting the conversation back to avocational interests being precluded, but can supply no particulars as to why this is not permitted. Now they have relented. A greenhouse, to my way of thinking, keeps me entertained on site and allows me to live independently by reducing my dependence on Safeway. Mr. H does not share that sentiment so I will have to write another one of my famous letters explaining what the definition of “avocational” is and also recreational pastimes. I wonder if they make an artificial insemination device for fruit trees?  A new reloader with all the dies for my favorite calibres would be in order , too. It would make me truly independent if the balloon goes up and I find myself isolated from society. Why the possibilities are endless. They’re getting off cheaply, too. I put in the indoor shooting range when I built the house.

I think our Portland Vet said it best when he summed it up thusly:

Once you get the idea of why you NEED products, then it gets easy to actually explain it to someone who is not in your condition. That was one of the biggest hurdles I made in my plan, I got the counselor, who is a clinical psychologist to understand that there is no way that he can actually understand the needs I have. Without being totally disabled in my early 40’s, some days not even being able to drive or walk, I got it through his head that the only people who can actually honestly say they understand what my needs are is someone who is disabled in a similar manner, and even then they are not exactly like me and my family so there really is no comparison he can make.

Read them and weep, vA. The new computer comes in two weeks. 5 hours have been allocated for training in five increments. Then we’ll see about the greenhouse and a camera. I actually have a hand me down I’ve been shooting with recently so I may have to give the reloader more thought.

Posted in Independent Living Program, Tips and Tricks, Veterans Law | Tagged , , , , | 4 Comments

Mythbusters Online: Are we buying the vA excuses?

Most of us have seen the show “Mythbusters”, where two rather skilled mechanics perform some stunts to decide if a particular situation, often in movie stunts, were “real” or fake.

Well, Im not taking over their show, but there are a few myths running around about the vA that are not true.  I will look at one of these myths today.  Maybe, some more later.  Keep reading Ask nod to find out.

The vA often cites “the number of troops in two wars” as their excuse for the backlog, when Veterans advocates complain about the growing backlog of health care and compensation benefits at the Va.      Myth Busted.  There were more troops in Vietnam than in IRAQ and Afghanastan together.   Way more.

Here are the numbers:

Iraq and Afghanastan 161,000 source:  see page 6: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R40682.pdf

Vietnam:  (1968) 536,100   source:   http://www.americanwarlibrary.com/vietnam/vwatl.htm

So, as you can see its “myth busted”.   We had more than 3 times as many troops in Vietnam than in the current wars and Im not buying the Va’s “blame the Veteran” excuses.

Posted in Complaints Department, Guest authors, VA BACKLOG | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment