Citation Nr: 21011423
Decision Date: 03/01/21	Archive Date: 03/01/21

DOCKET NO. 17-36 252
DATE: March 1, 2021

ORDER

Service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability is granted.

FINDING OF FACT

1. The Veteran has diagnoses of psychotic disorder, psychosis, and unspecified schizophrenia spectrum and other psychotic disorder. Documented symptoms include bizarre behavior and hand gestures, anxiety, psychomotor agitation, sleep reversal, attending to internal stimuli, difficulty in crowds, and impulsive spending.

2. A January 2005 post-deployment health assessment note depressive symptoms. Sworn testimony indicates he had friends during his first deployment but that he became extremely sleep deprived during his second deployment because he was working both day and night shifts at the same time for several consecutive months.

3. Multiple competent and consistent lay reports (both in support of this appeal and in clinical settings) show he went to community college after discharge in 2005 but began exhibiting bizarre symptoms (e.g., sleeping in the closet, paranoia, talking to himself, avoiding any social interaction, inability to concentrate, depression, locking himself in his room, referring to the “devil” telling him things, etc.)

4. Absent any evidence to the contrary, the Board finds the evidence is at least in relative equipoise as to whether the Veteran has psychosis that first manifested to a compensable degree within the first post-service year and is, therefore, presumptively related to service under 38 U.S.C. § 1112.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1112, 1113, 5107(b) (2018); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(b), 3.307, 3.309 (2020).

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The appellant is a Veteran who served on active duty from September 2000 to September 2005. This matter is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2016 rating decision appealed in a timely September 2016 notice of disagreement (NOD) and perfected by a timely July 2017 substantive appeal in response to May 2017 statement of the case (SOC). In February 2021, a hearing was held before the undersigned.

For the detailed reasons outlined above, the Board grants the appeal in full, obviating any need for further discussion thereof at this time.

 

 

VICTORIA MOSHIASHWILI

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Attorney for the Board	M. Yuan, 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.