VA Claims Stuff Mainly

So, hello. I'm back with another bit of writing. They say if you spend 10,000 hours doing something you're a Professional. I forget who said it. A basketball player maybe. Not sure. Next paragraph.

In a previously published post, I was talking about one of my two claims I have in the shredder. The one about to be closed out and promulgated. The other live claim is for TDIU and that's past the HLR phase and kicked back to the Supplemental claim lane for development to schedule 4 or 5 C&P Exams. That's what they call it. Development of a substantially complete claim. So, back to the point...which revolves around what inferrenced language can we build from what Shane said. And I came up with worsened. It follows intuitively and logically, during service. Now she could have said, "due to the natural progress of the illness which began prior to service or was at least diagnosable according to..." According to what? What evidence are you going to use here? Evidence? Or are you going to just speculate? In which case nobody would ever be granted service connection for Bipolarity. So rule that out. Speculation is not proof of anything because it leaves room for debate. And the standard is unmistakeable. Clear and Unmistakable evidence such as a SF93, a historically official induction document noting the infirmity, statements made to others that made it into the record, or something said to the examiner during, in this case, a Telemental Health session. Two hours. Scheduled for one but she allotted two due to the complexity of the claim. And she used up every minute of it too. She just went right down the DBQ asking questions and occasionally engaging in small talk. Said she liked me because I had a sense of humor, liked it when I used the word swell and confided that I was communicating well with her today. Anyway, that's out of context here so....but back to what we were discussing. Oh, yeah, her analysis. Now, with that onboard. That knowledge, then, it turns now to what the rules say. And I use that term liberally loose too. Next paragraph.

So all I was trying to do was show that my present symptoms are related to prodromal symptoms exhibited during service. She said they were probably related. Of course, I recently learned that one must show a relationship between an event in service and their current diagnosis or, presumably, present symptomatology. That's the medical Nexus or link between service and now. Cause and effect is a higher standard and not applicable here. Just that there's an association between signs and symptoms in service and today's diagnosis or symptoms and I just repeated myself nearly verbatim. I'm kyna doing so on purpose. Read on if you wish. Or not. Next paragraph. 

So now there appears to be a concession indirectly that they are related, especially in the absence of any mention that they are not. So this pre-existing theory is a new reason. I see. There's no reason for the Rater to say there was no evidence of psychosis within the statutory one year presumptive period because that's just another justification to award service connection not the only way. Similarly, there are two other ways: continuity and chronicity but that's more for when medical records are skint for evidence of something lol. So, those augment the other 5 theories of entitlement to benefits. And I'm back full circle again here now because I applied for direct service connection. I didn't specify on the VA Form which pathway to SC I was asking VA to consider. I don't remember if there is a way to select a box for that on the 0995 or not tbh. Or if there's a remarks section. And I'm pretty sure they're duty bound to consider all the others. But that takes a lot of time and scanning through a lot of pages. A lot of scrolling. Looking at it as if I were a Rater. I've heard that some only have 15 minutes to decide on SC but don't quote me on that. They pry just consider the direct method by default and run with that. Because it's easier and they are acting in the best interest of the government. Or so they think anyway. Likely as not that it's just how shits done. That's what Shane at the VSO said. That they failed to consider SC via aggravation of a pre-existing condition. I'm thirsty. Line goes dead.