Citation Nr: 20005155 Decision Date: 01/22/20 Archive Date: 01/22/20 DOCKET NO. 17-22 932 DATE: January 22, 2020 ORDER Service connection for erectile dysfunction (ED), as secondary to the service-connected posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran is service connected for PTSD. 2. The Veteran has a current disability of ED. 3. The ED was caused by the service-connected PTSD. CONCLUSION OF LAW Resolving reasonable doubt, the criteria for service connection for ED, as secondary to the service-connected PTSD, have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5103, 5103A, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.159, 3.303, 3.310. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION The Veteran, who is the appellant, served on active duty from June 1984 to October 1984, and from February 1986 to November 1991. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2015 Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) rating decision. The instant matter was previously before the Board in February 2019 and was remanded to obtain a VA examination. A VA examination was administered in June 2019. For these reasons, the Board finds that the February 2019 remand directives have been satisfied. Service Connection for ED as Secondary to the PTSD Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Service connection may be granted for a disability that is proximately due to or the result of a service-connected disability. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.310(a). When service connection is thus established for a secondary condition, the secondary condition shall be considered a part of the original condition. See id.; Harder v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 183, 187 (1993). The controlling regulation has been interpreted to permit a grant of service connection not only for disability caused by a service-connected disability, but for the degree of disability resulting from aggravation of a non-service-connected disability by a service-connected disability. See Allen v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 439, 448 (1995). In other words, service connection may be granted for a disability found to be proximately due to, or the result of, a service-connected disease or injury. To prevail on the issue of secondary service causation, the record must show (1) evidence of a current disability, (2) evidence of a service-connected disability, and (3) medical nexus evidence establishing a connection between the current disability and the service-connected disability. Wallin v. West, 11 Vet. App. 509, 512 (1998); Reiber v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 513, 516-17 (1995). The Veteran contends that service connection is warranted for ED as secondary to the service-connected PTSD. In an October 2019 appellate brief, the Veteran contends that PTSD medication, including but not limited to Sertraline, is causing ED. The evidence of record reflects that the Veteran is service connected for PTSD and is diagnosed with ED. See June 2019 VA examination. The question in this case is whether the ED is etiologically related to the service-connected PTSD. The June 2019 VA examiner reported decreased libido as a side effect for sertraline, which is the PTSD medication that the Veteran has been taking to treat the service-connected PTSD. Based on the above, and resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, service connection for ED, as secondary to the service-connected PTSD, is warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. As secondary connection is being granted, there is no need to discuss entitlement to service connection on a direct, presumptive or any other basis, as other theories of service connection have been rendered moot, leaving no question of law or fact to decide. See 38 U.S.C. § 7104. J. PARKER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board P. Wasung, Associate Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential, and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.