Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Home Featured Former soldier with terminal cirrhosis denied PTSD benefits by Veterans Review and Appeal Board

Former soldier with terminal cirrhosis denied PTSD benefits by Veterans Review and Appeal Board

by HR Law Canada

A former regular member of the Canadian Armed Forces has had his claim for benefits related to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) denied by the Veterans Review and Appeal Board (VRAB).

The case involved an unnamed appellant who had initially been denied entitlement for PTSD by Veterans Affairs Canada on July 5, 2022. This decision was subsequently upheld by a VRAB Entitlement Review Decision dated May 24, 2023. The appellant then sought an appeal against this decision.

The appellant’s advocate presented a case emphasizing the unique pressures and challenges of military service, arguing that his PTSD originated from service-related events, including harassment in the workplace. Specific incidents cited included a threatening situation involving the burial of barrels, a suicide attempt following a punitive response from the military, and harassment following an assault charge.

Despite these submissions, the Panel focused on the lack of corroborative evidence and inconsistencies in the appellant’s account. The Panel noted that the appellant’s service records did not document any of the alleged incidents before the diagnosis of his terminal condition, alcoholic cirrhosis.

Additionally, the appellant’s own statements during his application for disability benefits in 2022 centered on the assault charge, without mention of the other alleged incidents.

The medical evidence, including reports from mental health professionals during and after the appellant’s service, did not substantiate a link between his PTSD and military service. The medical records mainly addressed personal problems, such as alcohol abuse and legal issues, without mentioning workplace harassment or service-related trauma.

In its decision, the Panel adhered to the criteria set out in Section 39 of the Veterans Review and Appeal Board Act, which requires a thorough consideration of all evidence and the drawing of every reasonable inference in favor of the appellant.

However, the Panel concluded that the appellant had not met the burden of proving a significant causal connection between his PTSD and military service.

This decision underscores the complexities and challenges in establishing a link between military service and subsequent mental health conditions, particularly in cases where documentary evidence and medical records do not corroborate the claimed service-related events.

The VRAB’s decision, while acknowledging the appellant’s health issues, ultimately found no basis to grant the disability award for PTSD related to Regular Force service.

“Given the fact that the Appeal Panel found that the Appellant’s statements and testimony were non-credible, any potential link of PTSD to the Appellant’s military service dissolved,” it said.

“The Appeal Panel acknowledges that the Appellant has numerous health issues and wishes him well.”

For more information, see 100005209512 (Re), 2023 CanLII 129828 (CA VRAB).

You may also like