wants justice for MMR daughter

[Guest guest]

wants justice for MMR daughter

http://www.dcthomson.co.uk/MAGS/POST/postindex.htm

By Iain on

was a healthy toddler at the time

she was given the measles, mumps and rubella triple vaccine.

A week later she was crying continuously with a temperature off the scale.

Her distraught mum, , rushed the little one

to a local doctor who said her throat and left ear were badly inflamed.

Problems persisted until, four months later,

further tests revealed had lost almost all hearing on that side.

This marked the beginning of a campaign for justice that’s still ongoing.

The injection she received was one of the first

variants of the vaccine, containing the Urabe form of mumps virus.

This was withdrawn in 1992 amid concerns over its

potential long-term effects and has no link to

the strain of MMR currently in use.

Mum is backed by four eminent doctors who

are convinced the jab was linked to ’s hearing difficulties.

Yet she has been denied legal aid to raise an

action against the pharmaceutical company that

manufactured the vaccine on the grounds that not enough children were affected.

Worried sick

Now she’s planning to take ’s case to the European Court of Human Rights.

“I’m not going to let it rest,” vowed the former

psychiatric nurse, from her home in Stonehaven.

was one of millions of children across the

UK to receive the Urabe-containing MMR jab

following its introduction in October 1988. Her

adverse reaction after receiving it had worried sick.

Yet she didn’t at first consider there could be a

link between the immunisation and ’s subsequent hearing problems.

It was almost five years after the injection, in

mid-1996, that a chance conversation with a

doctor alerted her to the possibility.

“I asked him why was so deaf in her left

ear and he asked if she’d ever had measles or mumps,” recalled.

“I said she hadn’t, but that she had been exposed

to the viruses via MMR. I began to wonder whether the vaccine had caused it.”

Concerns

contacted a support group for

vaccine-damaged children who confirmed they’d

received similar concerns from other worried

parents. They put her in contact with an English

solicitor they’d already dealt with.

“I wasn’t happy dealing with a lawyer in a

different country under a judicial system that’s completely alien to me.

“After all, my daughter was born in Scotland and

had been vaccinated in Scotland.

“But in early 2001, after raising my concerns

with the Justice Minister at Holyrood, it was

clear that I was left with little choice but to

issue instructions to the English solicitor.”

Over the next few months the law firm sent

sheaves of literature and papers all referring to

MMR and its potential links with autism and bowel disorders.

reckoned these were all irrelevant to ’s litigation.

“I had huge concerns as to the manner in which

this firm were handling my daughter’s case. It

didn’t seem to be going anywhere,” fumed.

“It became obvious they weren’t working on

anything other than whether the MMR vaccine caused autism and bowel disorders.

“ had neither of these conditions.

“I contacted the solicitor and said, ‘You cannot

take clients on to your books and not progress

their case,’ but little happened.

Sever ties

“I decided to sever my ties with them and lodge a

complaint with the governing body for solicitors in England, The Law Society.”

But after discovering there were still no lawyers

in Scotland handling MMR litigation placed

the matter in the hands of another England-based firm.

Their case was helped when medical experts

confirmed what had suspected all along ­

that there was a relationship, or in medical

terms a “primary causal link”, between ’s

deafness and the Urabe-containing MMR jab she’d been given as a baby.

Yet this still wasn’t enough to let take

GlaxoKline, the vaccine manufacturers, to court.

“The experts screened around 100 children but

they only established a link between the vaccine

and those suffering from what’s called sensorineural deafness,” she said.

“This group, which included , was only six strong.

“Because it was so small it didn’t satisfy what’s

called the cost/benefit rule and as a result the

legal aid we had been granted was removed.”

Documents

Since then, a research organisation specialising

in freedom of information law has uncovered

documents that appear to strengthen ’s case.

These reveal that government officials had

serious concerns about the Urabe strain of MMR at

least eight months before the first child was injected.

Last month the Law Society in England upheld “to

a limited extent” five of the eight grievances

raised against the solicitors she originally retained.

They have awarded a four-figure sum in compensation.

But is maintaining her quest for redress from GlaxoKline.

“I still believe has a claim against the

vaccine manufacturer for negligence and I think

it’s a disgrace she was refused legal aid given

four eminent practitioners support her case,” she said.

“My next step is the European Court of Human

Rights and I will continue to fight like fury for

my daughter, even if it means going to Strasbourg.”

A spokeswoman for GlaxoKline said, “We are

aware of the situation with ,

however, it would be inappropriate for GSK to

make any comment on individual cases that are subject to legal proceedings.”

<http://www.dcthomson.co.uk/MAGS/POST/news_index.htm><<<

News index © All copyright D.C. Thomson & Co. Ltd., 2008

--------------------------------------------------------

Sheri Nakken, former R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath

Vaccination Information & Choice Network, Nevada City CA & Wales UK

Vaccines - http://www.wellwithin1.com/vaccine.htm

Vaccine Dangers & Homeopathy Online/email courses - next classes Sept 08