
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: WEDNESDAY, April 19, 1995                   TAG: 9504190055
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL                    PAGE: A-4   EDITION: STATE 
SOURCE: Associated Press
DATELINE: WASHINGTON                                LENGTH: Medium

VACCINE CASE REVERSED SUPREME COURT LIMITS DAMAGES

The Supreme Court on Tuesday made it harder for parents who say their children were harmed by vaccines to collect from a federal compensation fund. The ruling might save the government tens of millions of dollars.

The justices ruled unanimously in an Indiana case that a federal law requires proof that children had no symptoms of a particular injury before getting vaccinated.

If such proof isn't provided, an injured person ``does not make out a case for compensation,'' Justice David Souter wrote for the court.

Peter H. Meyers, a George Washington University law professor who represents families seeking compensation under the federal law, called the decision ``disappointing but not a devastating defeat.''

``The silver lining is that the ruling is narrowly focused,' Meyers said. ``It leaves open other avenues to successful claims.''

The vaccination-compensation case stems from a program Congress created in 1986 to immunize Americans against infectious diseases and to compensate those who suffered seriously adverse reactions to immunization.

Thousands of such claims were filed shortly after the law was passed.

One such claim was filed by the parents of Maggie Whitecotton of Crawfordsville, Ind. She was born in 1975 with a condition known as microcephaly - an abnormally small head.

As described in court documents, Maggie was healthy, developmentally and physically, until she received a diphtheria- pertussis-tetanus (DPT) vaccine when 4 months old.

The day after the vaccine was administered, Maggie suffered a series of seizures. She suffered occasional seizures over the next five years, and has been left mentally and physically disabled.

Maggie's parents, Kay and Michael Whitecotton, applied in 1990 for compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986.

Government officials ruled the Whitecottons were not entitled to compensation because, they said, Maggie's disabilities were caused not by the vaccination but by a pre-existing brain disorder.

The Whitecottons won a legal victory last year when a federal appeals court ordered the government to pay them compensation.

But the Supreme Court decision reversed the appeals court's ruling and sent the case back to the lower court.

by CNB