We just came back from the VA and everything checked out fine - no heart condition. His cholesterol is still running high but so far it has not affected his plumbing - any of it. The C& P to verify his mental health condition - basically to determine the actual culprit behind his disability finally came back with a more definable condition that's seen as being service connected. I guess the VA had to hear from one of their own raters, read their own tests to acknowledge the PTSD as being a direct result of trauma experienced while in combat.: Statement as to Whether Psychometric scores are consistent with a diagnosis of ptsd, based on cutting scores/normative datas: Present scores are consistent with a diagnosis of PTSD. ... symptoms are consistent with a diagnosis of severe ptsd.... the gentleman has initially been a repressor, and his florid breakthrough of agitation, flashbacks, and disoriented behavior in the 1990's was more likely than not a manifestation of his PTSD. Because his treating psychiatrist was unaware of this man's military service in the Viet Nam war zone, he did not identify the symptoms as having an etiology of PTSD. Flashbacks, for instance, got interpreted as hallucinations, leading to what has turned out to be a misnomer of diagnostics. The veteran was labeled with Schizoaffective Disorder, which likely than not, is incorrect... No other psychological disorder verified by the present testing. His PTSD score, as measured by the Mississippi, is almost two standards deviations above the mean for Viet Nam era vets diagnosed with this disorder( PTSD) The MCMI further shows severe symptoms. VALIDITY OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TEST RESULTS: Valid.
This is the second well documented evidence that backs up hd's claim, the fact its the second exam from the VA is huge. I sincerely hope the VA takes a closer look at what we have been through. I am by no means an expert qualified to make the deteminations substantiating a SC claim - but when it is this blatant, this obvious that a gross error is happening the VA venue of denial supports harm rather than assistance. Here at this site and elsewhere I have identified myself as being affected personally with PTSD - the trauma I was exposed to has been well documented. The experts hired by the entitiy responsible for identifying my onset of PTSD for Worker's Compensation were highly qualified and considered tops in their field. This exposure to PTSD provided more than a casual connection allowing me to consider my husband's condition from a very informed point of view. The fact his collapse at work occurred long before I arrived in his life, the fact it was documented by his employment, dispells any suspicion of collusion on my part. My own struggles with PTSD actually hindered my earlier contributions to assist him in his claim. My case was filed in 1998 - his case with the VA was filed in 2007. I had to become mentally stable and grounded before I would even consider this ordeal... given the amount of stress it has brought into our lives I am thankful I did. I shudder to think of the many, many men and women who lack the support I was able to give my husband. Hopefully this latest round of testing, this clarification of true etimology will support a higher SC rating for hd's PTSD - well beyond the pitiful side order of 10% currently given for SC PTSD and remove the erronious higher NSC rating for Schizoaffective Disorder.
This is the second well documented evidence that backs up hd's claim, the fact its the second exam from the VA is huge. I sincerely hope the VA takes a closer look at what we have been through. I am by no means an expert qualified to make the deteminations substantiating a SC claim - but when it is this blatant, this obvious that a gross error is happening the VA venue of denial supports harm rather than assistance. Here at this site and elsewhere I have identified myself as being affected personally with PTSD - the trauma I was exposed to has been well documented. The experts hired by the entitiy responsible for identifying my onset of PTSD for Worker's Compensation were highly qualified and considered tops in their field. This exposure to PTSD provided more than a casual connection allowing me to consider my husband's condition from a very informed point of view. The fact his collapse at work occurred long before I arrived in his life, the fact it was documented by his employment, dispells any suspicion of collusion on my part. My own struggles with PTSD actually hindered my earlier contributions to assist him in his claim. My case was filed in 1998 - his case with the VA was filed in 2007. I had to become mentally stable and grounded before I would even consider this ordeal... given the amount of stress it has brought into our lives I am thankful I did. I shudder to think of the many, many men and women who lack the support I was able to give my husband. Hopefully this latest round of testing, this clarification of true etimology will support a higher SC rating for hd's PTSD - well beyond the pitiful side order of 10% currently given for SC PTSD and remove the erronious higher NSC rating for Schizoaffective Disorder.





