Citation Nr: 21067076 Decision Date: 11/03/21 Archive Date: 11/03/21 DOCKET NO. 20-00 151 DATE: November 3, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety is denied. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran's adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety is not etiologically related to service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5103, 5103A; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served honorably on active duty from January 1967 to May 1970, to include service in the Republic of Vietnam. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2015 rating decision of a Regional Office (RO) of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). 1. Entitlement to service connection for adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety is denied. The Veteran contends his current adjustment disorder with anxiety is related to his active-duty service, to include his service in the Republic of Vietnam. Under the relevant laws and regulations, 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. Generally, the evidence must show: (1) the existence of a present disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-67 (Fed. Cir. 2004); Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498, 505 (1995); see Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013) (noting that nexus may be demonstrated by a showing of continuity of symptomatology where the disability claimed qualifies as a chronic disease listed in 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a)). With regard to a present disability, the May 2015 VA examiner diagnosed the Veteran with an adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood. Thus, the first service connection element is met. With regard to an in-service disease or injury, the Veteran's service treatment records (STRs) do not show that the Veteran sought treatment for any mental health concerns during active service. The Veteran asserts that his depression existed during and after his service in Vietnam. See e.g., December 2019 VA Form 9. The Veteran also stated that his depressed mood and anxiety were the result of experiences he had and things he observed during his service, to include an Army hospital containing many wounded soldiers, as well as being attacked while traveling in a Navy Panel Truck. See VA 21-0781 statement in support of claim for PTSD; see also December 2019 VA Form 9. However, the Board finds that even if the second element of service connection was conceded, the evidence of record does not support that the Veteran's current adjustment disorder is etiologically related to his active service. Significantly, the March 2015 VA examination opined that the Veteran's current adjustment disorder is less likely than not caused by or a result of his service in a hostile environment in the Republic of Vietnam. The VA examiner reasoned that "the Veteran endorsed symptoms of adjustment disorder with both symptoms of anxiety and depression, which according to the Veteran, onset within three months of his (described) forced retirement and other life stressors since the Veteran and his family moved to Louisiana. The Veteran continues to experience symptoms, as his stressor-events have not been resolved or ceased. Factual information made available to the examiner via CPRS records indicates that the Veteran had no history of diagnosis nor treatment of mental illness prior to 2015." VA treatment records support this statement by the March 2015 VA examiner. The earliest records reflecting psychiatric treatment for the Veteran are dated January 2015. While the Veteran is competent to report having experienced symptoms of depression in service, he is not competent to link his current psychiatric disability to in-service symptoms or injury. The issue is medically complex. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377, 1377 n.4 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Therefore, it is outside the competence of the Veteran in this case because the record does not show that she has the skills or medical training to make such a determination. The Board finds the VA examiner's opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's adjustment disorder to be more probative than the Veteran's lay assertions. The VA examiner's opinion is based on an accurate medical history, examination and interview of the Veteran, and provides an explanation that contains clear conclusions and supporting data. Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295, 304 (2008). Accordingly, the Board finds that the weight of the evidence is against finding the Veteran's adjustment disorder with anxiety is related to his active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. As the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim, further application of the benefit-of-the-doubt doctrine is not warranted. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. The Board is grateful for the Veteran's honorable service, and this decision is not meant to detract in any way from the Veteran's service. Unfortunately, however, for the reasons and bases discussed above, the competent and probative evidence of record preponderates against a finding that the Veteran's adjustment disorder with anxiety is service connected. Cynthia M. Bruce Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board R. M. Lowman, 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.