Whenever the VA makes changes like this,
they always allow for comments on the proposed changes. We asked for feedback
from you, our veterans, so that we could compile and submit a report detailing
the main issues that you brought up. We had many people participate and submit
comments, and we are excited to now report that we have submitted the following
comments to the VA.
Thank you to all who replied. There were
many great circumstances and arguments raised, and we feel that there is a good
chance that our comments could make changes to the laws and have a hand in
ensuring more fair and accurate ratings for our female veterans. We hope to be
able to soon report a successful outcome after the VA has taken all comments
into consideration and made the final ruling on the proposed changes. We’ll
keep you updated.
The VA is rewriting the entire VASRD over
the course of 2015 (it will most likely spill into 2016 as well), so many more
opportunities will be coming to comment and make your voice be heard. As soon
as each section of proposed changes is published, we’ll get a blog up and
invite comments, so check back regularly to make sure that you have the chance
to make a difference in your life and the lives of other disabled veterans.
Here is the report we filed with the VA in
As a national veterans’ organization, we at
have the great opportunity to interact with a large number of disabled
veterans, many of which are female. After blogging about the proposed changes
to the Gynecological Conditions and Disorders of the Breast, we received
numerous comments and opinions about the proposed changes. The following
comments are compilations of the main issues our veterans brought to our
attention. Thank you for taking our comments into consideration.
We would like to propose adding a new code
or adjusting the proposed codes to include infertility due to the loss or loss
of use of other organs besides the uterus and ovaries. While the uterus and
ovaries provide the main source of female reproductive capabilities, the
malfunctioning of other parts of the female reproductive system can also cause
similar outcomes and significantly affect the ability of a woman to conceive
and bear children.
While the use of analogous ratings could provide fair ratings for veterans,
we have been familiarized with the stories of many veterans who have been
denied a fair rating because of this flaw in the VASRD rating criteria.
In one particular instance, a veteran
developed a severe infection while on active duty that resulted in the removal
of one fallopian tube and the complete loss of use of the other. She was
declared infertile at age 19. After leaving the military, she applied for
disability benefits, but was only awarded a 0% rating under code 7614 for
injury of the fallopian tubes. The rating criteria under this code only
provides a compensable rating if there are active symptoms, but doesn’t take into
account the loss of reproductive abilities. Looking at the codes (7617 – 7620)
for loss or loss of use of the uterus or ovaries, the minimum rating for a
condition that causes infertility is 20%. This rating does not take into
account any symptoms at all, just whether or not the organs are able to
function reproductively. As such, it would only make sense to have any damage
to any part of the female reproductive system that causes infertility to be rated
at least 20%. After 25 years and repeated appeals, this veteran is still only
receiving a 0% rating for a condition that made her infertile, while many other
veterans with the exact same symptoms, just different organs damaged, have
ratings of 20% or more.
Although not directly related to the rating
criteria, we would like to propose adding repeated miscarriages to the
presumptive list for female veterans who have been exposed to radiation,
herbicides, or other environments that could negatively impact the ability of a
fetus to properly develop and carry to full term.
There is a large amount of direct evidence
that exposure to radiation and other agents can have a huge impact on the life
of an unborn child, even years after the mother was exposed. The largest cache
of supportive data for this argument is undoubtedly the massive amount of birth
defects found in children of Vietnamese mothers and female Vietnam veterans who
had been exposed to Agent Orange. While the VA offers benefits for children born
with birth defects of such female veterans, there are no direct benefits
offered to veterans who are unable to bear children at all after the same
One of our veterans argued the issue that
“repeated miscarriages from an unknown etiology while on Active Duty should be
considered as potentially ratable, and awarded Special Monthly Compensation (k).”
Finally, a question: With female sexual
arousal disorder now recognized, how powerful will it be as supporting evidence
for military sexual trauma?