Ascherl v. Brown — Duty to assist requires a thorough PTSD examination and development of relevant records

The appellant served in Vietnam and had long-standing psychiatric diagnoses, including paranoid schizophrenia. After prior final denials of service connection for a nervous condition, he specifically sought service connection for PTSD and described in-service stressors and post-service symptoms. The Board reopened the claim based on new and material evidence, but then denied service connection and declined to order another psychiatric examination, reasoning that PTSD had never been diagnosed and schizophrenia had been consistently shown instead. The Court held that the Board had not adequately developed the PTSD theory and had failed to satisfy the statutory duty to assist under 38 U.S.C. § 5107(a).

The Court explained that once a veteran presents a well-grounded claim, VA must assist by developing the facts pertinent to the claim, including obtaining a thorough and contemporaneous examination that considers prior treatment records. Because the record was inadequate to determine whether the veteran had PTSD and, if so, whether it was related to service, remand was required. The Court also emphasized that PTSD is evaluated under different diagnostic criteria than schizophrenia and that reasonably raised issues must be addressed. On remand, the Board was instructed to seek relevant records, provide an adequate psychiatric examination, and address combat/stressor development as necessary, while also supplying adequate reasons or bases.

Where a veteran presents a well-grounded claim for PTSD, VA must fully develop the claim with relevant records and an adequate psychiatric examination; if the record is inadequate for a fully informed decision, remand is required.

A bare refusal to order a PTSD-focused examination, especially when the claim is reasonably raised and the existing exam addresses a different diagnosis, can be a duty-to-assist failure requiring remand.

This case helps advocates identify when VA has conflated one psychiatric diagnosis with a separate PTSD theory or relied on an exam that did not actually evaluate the claimed condition. It also supports requests for additional record development and a proper PTSD examination before the Board decides the claim.

Deciding a PTSD claim without obtaining an examination that addresses PTSD or without developing relevant service and medical records.

A veteran with prior schizophrenia diagnoses later files a separate claim for PTSD based on Vietnam stressors, but VA denies the claim after an exam that discusses only psychosis and never evaluates PTSD or corroborates stressors.

Cite this case to argue that the Board cannot deny a reasonably raised PTSD claim on an incomplete record and must ensure an examination that directly addresses PTSD, prior treatment records, and any needed stressor development.

Murphy v. Derwinski, Green v. Derwinski, Hyder v. Derwinski, Ivey v. Derwinski, Murincsak v. Derwinski, Douglas v. Derwinski, EF v. Derwinski, Myers v. Derwinski, Gilbert v. Derwinski, Fletcher v. Derwinski