National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

PAPERBACK
price:$85.50
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Improving the Presumptive Disability Decision-Making Process for Veterans (2008)
Board on Military and Veterans Health (BMVH)

Citation Manager

. "Appendix E: Arguments Favoring and Opposing Presumptions." Improving the Presumptive Disability Decision-Making Process for Veterans. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2008.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
425
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Improving the Presumptive Disability Decision-Making Process for Veterans

Arguments Favoring Presumptions

Arguments Opposing Presumptions

Medical uncertainty.

“Question of fact.”

“The proposal (by the Bradley Commission) to throw out … the presumption for service connection of certain chronic diseases—tropical diseases—was tried and it did not work. The doctors could not agree about whether the disease discovered 1 year of 2 years after separation from the service had its inception while in the service or not. The Congress became so tired of the subject that it decided they would be given a period of time of the subject that it decided they would be given a period of time in which it would be presumed that the disease had its inception while in the service.”

“Last year it was determined—and I had hoped permanently—that a service-connected disability is a question of fact rather than a question of law. In other words, each individual case should and must be considered on it merits, and there is no justification for legislative dicta which, contrary to fact, provide that thousands of individual cases of sickness which commenced 4, 5, or 6 years after the termination of the war are caused by war services.”

O. W. Clark, National Director of Legislation, DAV Hearings Before the House Comm. on Veterans’ Affairs, 84th Cong., 2d Sess. (1956)

Veto message of President Roosevelt, Independent Offices Appropriation Bill (1935) H. R. Doc. No. 291, 73d Cong., 2d Sess. (1934)

“It is the opinion of the American Legion that until American medicine has reached a point where it can determine with more than a reasonable degree of accuracy whether in fact certain types of disease did or did not have their inception during the course of a man’s service, the veteran should be entitled, in the areas of doubt … to the presumption that his disease or disability, within reasonable periods now or to be specified, was the result of his service.”

Relationship to service.

“The present list of ‘chronic’ diseases for which service connection is granted is one deeply rooted in the history of the claims program, but one regarding which it would be futile to contend that inclusion of a disease in the list is substantiated by any likelihood of actual incurrence in service or in any way resulting from the circumstances of service. The diseases when correctly diagnosticated, are indeed of chronic type, and their presence within a year after discharge raises a strong probability that part of the course of the disease (not necessarily an early part, unless the service was much longer than the minimum 90 days required) coincided with the ‘period of service, but the likelihood that any of their course was influenced by the facts or circumstances of service is extremely remote.”

Statement of Donald R. Wilson, past National Commander, American Legion Id., 3654-55 (1957)

 

Internal Memorandum from Assistant Administrator for Claims to Assistant Administrator for Legislation October 20, 1947

Page
425
Front Matter (R1-R32)
General Summary (1-6)
Summary (7-26)
1 Introduction (27-35)
2 A Brief History of Presumptive Disability Decisions for Veterans (36-51)
3 The Presumptive Disability Decision-Making Process (52-69)
4 Legislative Background on Presumptions (70-82)
5 Case Studies Summary Chapter (83-135)
6 Establishing an Evidence-Based Framework (136-149)
7 Scientific Evidence for Causation in the Population (150-174)
8 Synthesizing the Evidence for Causation (175-197)
9 Applying Population-Based Results to Individuals: From Observational Studies to Personal Compensation (198-236)
10 Health and Exposure Data Infrastructure to Improve the Scientific Basis of Presumptions (237-297)
11 Governmental Classification and Secrecy (298-308)
12 The Way Forward (309-328)
13 Recommendations (329-338)
Appendix A: Statement of the Veterans' Disability Benefits Commission to the Institute of Medicine's Committee on the Presumptive Disability Decision-Making Process, May 31, 2006 (339-343)
Appendix B: Committee on Evaluation of the Presumptive Disability Decision-Making Process for Veterans Open Session Meeting Agendas (344-348)
Appendix C: Glossary (349-408)
Title Page (409-409)
Appendix D: Historical Background (410-423)
Appendix E: Arguments Favoring and Opposing Presumptions (424-433)
Appendix F: Tables: Summary of Presumptive Disability Decision-Making Legislative History (434-565)
Appendix G: VA's White Paper on the Presumptive Disability Decision-Making Process (566-569)
Appendix H: IOM's Statements of Task and Conclusions for Agent Orange and Gulf War Reports (570-591)
Appendix I: Case Studies (592-709)
Appendix J: Causation and Statistical Causal Methods (710-719)
Appendix K: Sources of Health and Exposure Data for Veterans (720-763)
Appendix L: Additional Classification and Secrecy Information (764-773)
Appendix M: Biographical Sketches of Committee Members, Consultants, and Staff (774-781)