RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        8 August 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050014561


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Mrs. Nancy L. Amos                |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. James E. Anderholm            |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Dale E. DeBruler              |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. James R. Hastie               |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that her medical records be
corrected to show her diagnosis as major depressive disorder rather than
paranoid schizophrenia.

2.  The applicant states she was given the wrong diagnosis.  She had major
depressive disorder and was taking Prozac.

3.  The applicant provides three documents from her service medical records
dated 30 April 2001, 15 May 2001, and 29 May 2001; her DD Form 214
(Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period
ending      22 April 2002; and two DD Forms 4187 (Personnel Action), dated
October 1999 (day illegible) and15 December 2000.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 22 April 2002.  The application submitted in this case is dated
4 May 2005 and was received in this office on 6 October 2005.

2.  Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for
correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery
of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant enlisted in the U. S. Army Reserve on 17 July 1997.

4.  The applicant provided a DA Form 4187, dated October 1999, that shows
she requested a medical discharge as she was under psychiatric supervision.
 This action was apparently never acted upon.  Orders dated 20 September
2000 show she was transferred from one troop program unit to another.

5.  The applicant provided a DA Form 4187, dated 15 December 2000, that
shows she requested enlistment in the Regular Army.  On 26 February 2001,
she enlisted in the Regular Army.

6.  On or about 30 April 2001, the applicant was taken to Darnall Army
Hospital, Fort Hood, TX after family members became concerned over her
depression and called her unit.

7.  The Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) Narrative Summary, prepared by a
staff psychiatrist, indicates the applicant was admitted to the inpatient
unit for paranoid behavior.  It also indicated that she had a prior history
of psychiatric illness for which she was treated with Risperdal, Zyprexa,
and Prozac.  (Risperdal and Zyprexa are medications prescribed for the
treatment of psychotic disorders, to include schizophrenia.  Prozac is a
medication prescribed for the treatment of depression.)  The Narrative
Summary indicated the applicant was extremely paranoid on initial
interview.  She had been seen in the Psychology clinic for two months prior
to her admission, and her behavior was noted to have deteriorated to
psychosis.  Her chain of command informed the evaluating physician that the
applicant had approached them and stated that she thought someone was
poisoning her.  At first, she denied any auditory/visual hallucinations.
Later, she was able to tell the nurses that she was hearing voices telling
her to kill herself.

8.  The applicant was diagnosed with psychosis, not otherwise specified.
She was referred to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).  She was found to be
mentally competent and able to manage her own affairs.

9.  On 13 November 2001, the applicant did not agree with the MEB’s
findings and recommendation.  She contended that she answered all the
questions that were addressed to her while she was in the inpatient ward.
She did not refuse any medication.  She told her doctors that she was
suffering from manic depression and was taking Prozac, but she did not
think her mental health was deteriorating to psychosis.  She stated she
never told her chain of command that she thought someone was poisoning her.
 She stated she felt her chain of command would say anything to get her out
of the unit as well as out of the service.  She never told any of the
nurses on the ward that she thought she was hearing voices telling her to
kill herself.  Prior to going on active duty she was able to fulfill her
military obligation in the U. S. Army Reserve.  She believed she was able
to function in society as well as in a military environment.

10.  The Deputy Commander for Clinical Services apparently reviewed and
denied the applicant’s appeal of the MEB’s findings.  On 19 November 2001,
she indicated that she acknowledged receipt of the review and concurred.

11.  On 26 November 2001, an informal PEB found the applicant physically
unfit due to a diagnosis of psychotic disorder, not otherwise specified,
EPTS (existed prior to service), and not permanently service aggravated.
The PEB
recommended she be separated without disability benefits.  On 7 December
2001, the applicant nonconcurred with the findings of the informal PEB and
demanded a formal hearing of her case.

12.  The applicant apparently subsequently waived her right to a formal
hearing. On 22 January 2002, she indicated she concurred with the informal
PEB and waived a formal hearing of her case.

13.  The applicant requested continuation on active duty on an unknown
date.  On 23 January 2002, she was found to be ineligible for continuation
on active duty.

14.  On 22 April 2002, the applicant was honorably discharged, under the
provisions of Army Regulation 635-40, without disability benefits for a
disability that existed prior to service.

15.  Army Regulation 635-40 governs the evaluation of physical fitness of
Soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of
physical disability.  The unfitness is of such a degree that a Soldier is
unable to perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating in such a
way as to reasonably fulfill the purposes of his employment on active duty.


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  It is acknowledged that, at the time of the applicant’s treatment in
April 2001, it appears she was being evaluated only because family members
became concerned over her depression and called her unit.  It appears she
was taking only Prozac at that time.

2.  It is also noted, however, that in October 1999 the applicant indicated
she was under psychiatric supervision and requested a medical discharge.
While that October 1999 DA Form 4187 did not indicate what type of
psychiatric supervision she was under, the MEB Narrative Summary noted that
she had been prescribed not only Prozac but also Risperdal, Zyprexa.  These
latter two medications are not prescribed for the treatment of depression,
but they are prescribed for the treatment of psychotic disorders.

3.  The Board will not change comments made in a psychiatric report.
Almost by definition, a psychiatrist must note personal impressions rather
than physical conditions in making a diagnosis.  The Board presumes the
applicant was evaluated by competent military medical personnel and
therefore finds no reason to change the psychiatrist’s diagnosis.

4.  In addition, the Army has an interest in promoting the reliability of
its medical records.  Alteration of a diagnosis in those records after the
fact may lead to fundamental questions about the veracity of the records in
this case and in general.  For these reasons, the Board declines to alter a
diagnosis in the applicant’s medical records.  The Secretary’s interest is
in ensuring an orderly system in which a physician makes certain
observations and records them faithfully in the medical records at the
time.  It would take an extraordinary showing for the Board to alter such a
diagnosis.  In this case, the evaluating psychiatrist made a diagnosis in
good faith.  That observation was duly recorded in the applicant’s medical
records and she has not presented sufficient reason to alter that
observation.

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 22 April 2002; therefore, the time for
the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice
expired on         21 April 2005.  The applicant did not file within the 3-
year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation
or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
failure to timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__jea___  __ded___  __jrh___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate
the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board
determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis
for correction of the records of the individual concerned.

2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations
prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient basis to waive the
statute of limitations for timely filing or for correction of the records
of the individual concerned.




                                  __James E. Anderholm__
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050014561                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060808                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |124.01                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]