Supreme Court To Decide On Vaccine Injuries
8 CommentsBy Ed Silverman // March 9th, 2010 // 8:56 am
The US Supreme Court has agreed to determine whether a federal law on vaccine injuries shields vaccine makers from certain types of product-liability lawsuits. The court will review a Pennsylvania lawsuit filed by a couple who allege their 6-month-old daughter developed residual seizure disorder after being vaccinated with a DTP vaccine made by Wyeth.
The parents maintain their daughter, who is now a teenager, has profound developmental impairments and will need care for the rest of her life, The Wall Street Journal writes. They sought compensation in the US Court of Federal Claims, but when the claim was rejected, they filed a state court lawsuit alleging Wyeth could have marketed a safer vaccine but chose not to do so, the paper adds (here is the docket). Oral arguments are expected in the fall.
A federal appeals court ruled last year the lawsuit was preempted by the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, which created a national compensation program for vaccine-injury claims, but also shielded vaccine makers from some lawsuits, the Journal continues. Under the law, a vaccine maker can’t be sued if a vaccine-related injury resulted from side effects that were unavoidable even if the vaccine was made properly and accompanied by proper directions and warnings, the paper writes.
Wyeth, which has denied its vaccine caused the injuries and discontinued the vaccine in 1998, the supply of childhood vaccines could be threatened by increased litigation if the Supreme Court decides in favor of the family, according to the Journal.
Two years ago, the Georgia Supreme Court allowed a family to pursue a lawsuit claiming their son suffered a severe disability after receiving several vaccines containing thimerosal. The Journal notes that case is being appealed by Wyeth and GlaxoSmithKline at the Supreme Court (background).
The White House is siding with vaccine makers in the Georgia case. US Solicitor General Elena Kagan wrote in a brief that the Georgia court was incorrect and could impede vaccine development and production, the Journal points out.
Justice in MI
Here we go again…
My understanding of the Vaccine Act was that people could go ahead and file state tort suits if, in their view, the response of the “vaccine court” was inadequate. Hopefully, someone will clarify.
Anyway, it’s Wyeth V. …. with preemption, and this time the Obama administration on the preemption side.
patrons99
This could be good news. There are quite a few VERY pro-pharma federal laws which need to be tested in court, by the highest court, if necessary.
“The White House is siding with vaccine makers…”. The White House is siding with Wyeth and GSK. What a surprise!
John
I was intrigued by the ambiguous language of the law, which preempts state lawsuits “if the injury or death resulted from side effects that were unavoidable even though the vaccine was properly prepared…”. One interpretation would be that the law preempts all lawsuits related to vaccine design, and allows only those that allege defects in manufacture. Would be interesting to see the text of the Appeals court decision if anyone knows where to find it.
pharmavet
There is a valid reason that the Federal Gov’t has to protect the vaccine industry and it has nothing to do with childhood vaccines. We live in a world where the threat of bioterrorism is still very real, and we need a viable vaccine industry to be able to respond to this threat. This is why I disagreed with our Govt’s decision to destroy all remaining stores of smallpox virus, while we know that enemies of this country have certainly have not done the same.
patrons99
Vet - I would highly recommend an article by Jennifer Craig, BSN, MA, Ph.D., on February 26, 2010, titled “Smallpox Vaccine: Origins of Vaccine Madness”.
http://www.medicalvoices.org/es/vaccination/articles/smallpox-vaccine-origins-of-vaccine-madness/imprimir.html
I think that we may both be victims of the multigenerational indoctrination about the belief in vaccines.
http://vactruth.com/2010/02/14/multigenerational-vaccine-indoctrination/
Philip
Sure makes you trust the vaccine industry to consider they have no responsibility or incentive to create safe products
http://healthjournalclub.blogspot.com/
patrons99
Here is link to a VERY interesting press release from ISIS on 10/11/09, titled “Cardiovascular Risks from Swine Flu Vaccines” by Dr. Mae-Wan Ho.
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/CRSFV.php
Why isn’t this front page news in the mainstream media?
Justice in MI
Sorry if this is old news, but I learned today that CJ Roberts is recusing in this case, I assume because of his holdings in Pfwyzer, as he did in Warner-Lambert v. Kent.
I doubt it will make the difference here that it did there, but interesting.