To clarify a few aspects for anyone who is still unclear on the court/compensation bifurcation of the 1986 Act: Tom Stavola “Freedom and Ethics Alliance”
1. Any vaccine recommended for routine administration for children, or adults and children, is “covered” (must go through the NVICP). Shingles/Herpes Zoster vaccine is adult recommended only, and so one can utilize the court systems for this vaccine.
2. In order to sue in state courts, one must first use the NVICP. After the program has made a decision, the petitioner can choose to sue in state court. However, the 2011 Supreme Court Bruesewitz V. Wyeth – the unavoidably unsafe case – precludes petitioners from suing vaccine manufacturers for product design defects, even after going through the NVICP. One can; however, sue the vaccine manufacturer for fraud, for example.
3. In order to sue doctors in state courts, one must first use the NVICP, then you may decide to sue in state court with one of two claims: 1) medical malpractice; or 2) lack of informed consent. It’s typically almost impossible to be successful with either claim; however, you may have a slightly higher probability of winning “lack of informed consent” if one wasn’t provided the Vaccine Information Statement.
4. The 21st Century Cures Act pushes all claims related to death of unborn child into the NVICP, since this was a legal loophole prior to 2016 (which many were capitalizing on).
5. The proposal for amending the Vaccine Injury Table essentially allows the CDC – as Wayne mentioned heretofore – to direct any new recommended vaccines for pregnant women onto the Vaccine Injury Table. Thus, there will be no opportunity to sue in state court for new recommended vaccines, but if one experiences an adverse event that falls into the strict constraints of the vaccine injury table, your probability of compensation is significantly increased. Of course, for any non-table injury, proof of causation is much more arduous.
VLA Comment: The 1986 act gave immunity to all vaccine providers and directed compensation claims to special masters at the vaccine court. The funding for compensation and court comes from an excise tax to the consumer per vaccine. In other words those who are potentially harmed are paying into the fund. It is not funded by the manufacturers or government.
