DEPRESSION

Summary

The veteran, who served in the Army from February 1979 to November 1980, appeals the denial of service connection for paranoia with depression. The veteran asserts the condition is due to service. The Board noted the veteran's Army entrance examination showed a "yes" for depression and excessive worry, along with a family history of depression. The service treatment records (STR) from July 1980 diagnosed a "mixed character disorder" with symptoms of suspiciousness, poor interpersonal relations, and inability to adapt to military life, recommending administrative separation. However, the veteran had negative depression screenings in subsequent VA notes. The Board found no VA examination was required because there was no credible evidence of a current acquired psychiatric disorder, no in-service event or injury, and no competent evidence of a causative link to service. Citing precedent, the Board noted that personality disorders are considered congenital or developmental defects and cannot be granted service connection. While superimposed disorders on personality disorders can be service-connected, the Board found no evidence of any superimposed psychiatric disorders in this case. The Board gave more weight to the STR finding of mixed personality disorder, which is not a service-connectable condition. As the evidence weighed against a current mental health disability and the persuasive evidence was against the claim, service connection was denied.

Rationale

No credible evidence of current acquired psychiatric disorder; No credible evidence of in-service event or injury; No competent evidence of causative link to service; Personality disorder not service-connectable

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26030332
Decision Date: 04/02/26	Archive Date: 04/02/26

DOCKET NO. 201002-112340
DATE: April 2, 2026

ORDER

Entitlement to service connection for paranoia with depression is denied. 

FINDING OF FACT

1. The Veteran's diagnosed mixed personality disorder is considered a congenital or developmental defect and is not a disease or injury subject to service connection.

2. The evidence of record persuasively weighs against finding that the Veteran has had an acquired psychiatric disorder at any time during or approximate to the pendency of the claim.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for service connection for paranoia with depression have not been met.  38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 4.127, 4.9.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran served on active duty from February 1979 to November 1980.

This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2019 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).  

In the October 2020 VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement), the Veteran elected the Hearing docket.  A May 9, 2024 notification advised the Veteran that a hearing was scheduled for August 12, 2024. The Veteran did not appear for the scheduled Board hearing.

Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the October 2019 agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) decision on appeal, as well as any evidence submitted by the Veteran [or representative] within 90 days following the date of the scheduled hearing.  38?C.F.R. §?20.302(c).  If evidence was submitted either (1) during the period after the AOJ issued the decision on appeal and prior to the date of the scheduled Board hearing, or (2) more than 90 days following the date of the scheduled hearing, the Board did not consider it in its decision.  38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.302(c), 20.801. 

If the Veteran would like VA to consider any evidence that was submitted that the Board could not consider, the Veteran may file a Supplemental Claim (VA Form 20-0995) and submit or identify this evidence.  38 C.F.R. § 3.2501. If the evidence is new and relevant, VA will issue another decision on the claim[s], considering the new evidence in addition to the evidence previously considered.  Id.  Specific instructions for filing a Supplemental Claim are included with this decision. 

Entitlement to service connection for paranoia with depression.

The Veteran seeks service connection for paranoia with depression that he asserts is due to service.  See August 2019 VA 21-526EZ, Fully Developed Claim.

Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated during active service.  38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a).  Generally, to establish service connection, there must be competent, credible evidence of (1) a current disability, (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of an injury or disease, and (3) a nexus, or link, between the current disability and the in-service disease or injury.  Saunders v. Wilkie, 886 F.3d 1356, 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2018); Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

Turning to the evidence of record, the Veteran's January 1979 Army entrance examination shows the Veteran checked "yes" for depression and excessive worry in the Report of Medical History, and noted having a family history of depression problems.  Additionally, the July 1980 STR shows that the Veteran was diagnosed with mixed character disorder, manifested by inability to adapt and function to military life, marked suspiciousness, passive-aggressive behavior and poor interpersonal relations.  He was strongly recommended for administrative separation from active duty as soon as possible.  See July 1980 Consultation Report.

The Veteran had negative depression screenings.  See November 2010, February 2012 Nursing Note, November 2014 Preventative Medicine Note, and May 2017 Nursing Note.

The Board acknowledges that a VA examination or medical opinion has not been obtained as to the claim for an acquired psychiatric disorder.  However, the Board finds that no VA examination is required because
 history of depression problems.  Additionally, the July 1980 STR shows that the Veteran was diagnosed with mixed character disorder, manifested by inability to adapt and function to military life, marked suspiciousness, passive-aggressive behavior and poor interpersonal relations.  He was strongly recommended for administrative separation from active duty as soon as possible.  See July 1980 Consultation Report.

The Veteran had negative depression screenings.  See November 2010, February 2012 Nursing Note, November 2014 Preventative Medicine Note, and May 2017 Nursing Note.

The Board acknowledges that a VA examination or medical opinion has not been obtained as to the claim for an acquired psychiatric disorder.  However, the Board finds that no VA examination is required because there is no credible evidence of a current disability, there is no credible evidence establishing that an event, injury, or disease occurred in-service, or manifested during any applicable presumptive period as to an acquired psychiatric disability.  And there is no competent and credible evidence of a causative link between an acquired psychiatric disability and service, so as to trigger the duty to provide a VA examination.  See Bardwell v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 36 (2010); see also Waters v. Shinseki, 601 F.3d 1274, 1278 (2010).  Therefore, the Board finds no VA examination or opinion is required and there is sufficient evidence to decide the claim.

The Board notes that "personality disorders are considered 'congenital or developmental defects' for which service connection cannot be granted because they 'are not diseases or injuries within the meaning of applicable legislation.'"  Conley v. Peake, 543 F.3d 1301, 1305 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (quoting 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (c)).

The Board notes that while service connection generally cannot be granted for a personality disorder, service connection may be granted for a disability due to aggravation of a constitutional or developmental abnormality (to include personality disorder) by a superimposed disease or injury.  38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303(c), 4.9, 4.127.  Disability resulting from a mental disorder that is superimposed upon a personality disorder may be service connected.  38 C.F.R. § 4.127.  Therefore, while 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303(c), 4.9, and 4.127 prohibit any grant of service connection for a personality disorder, additional superimposed psychiatric disorders the Veteran is diagnosed with may provide a basis for service connection.  See also O'Bryan v. McDonald, 771 F.3d 1376, 1380-81 (Fed. Cir. 2014).

The Board finds that in the present appeal, the evidence of record does not reflect the Veteran has a diagnosis of, or treatment for, an acquired psychiatric disorder to include depression.  The Board finds that there are no superimposed psychiatric disorders as the evidence of record does not reflect that the Veteran has any psychiatric disorders.  

As set out above, the Board finds that there is no evidence that the Veteran is competent to diagnose a specific disability, to opine as to the etiology of a disability, or to opine as to the degree of disability requiring medical diagnosis.  Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007).  

The Board notes that the diagnosis of mixed personality disorder cannot be the basis for service connection as it does not meet the definition of disease or injury within the meaning of VA statutes and regulations.  Personality disorders are considered congenital or developmental defects for which service connection cannot be granted.  See Winn v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 510 (1996); Conley v. Peake, 543 F.3d 1301 (Fed. Cir. 2008).

Consequently, the Board gives more probative weight to the competent and probative medical evidence of record, namely, the August 2019 STR, which found a mixed personality disorder.

A current disability is a cornerstone of a service connection claim.  Where the evidence does not support finding a current disability on which to predicate a grant of service connection, there can be no valid claim for that benefit.  See Gilpin v. West, 155 F.3d 1353 (Fed. Cir. 1998).

Here, the Board finds that the probative evidence weighs against finding the Veteran has a current mental health disability for which service connection can be awarded, including depression, and service connection must therefore be denied.  As the persuasive evidence is against the claim, the benefit-of-the-doubt doctrine does not apply.  38 U.S.C
 August 2019 STR, which found a mixed personality disorder.

A current disability is a cornerstone of a service connection claim.  Where the evidence does not support finding a current disability on which to predicate a grant of service connection, there can be no valid claim for that benefit.  See Gilpin v. West, 155 F.3d 1353 (Fed. Cir. 1998).

Here, the Board finds that the probative evidence weighs against finding the Veteran has a current mental health disability for which service connection can be awarded, including depression, and service connection must therefore be denied.  As the persuasive evidence is against the claim, the benefit-of-the-doubt doctrine does not apply.  38 U.S.C. § 5107 (b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102.

 

 

David Gratz

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Jordan, Jacquelynn

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.