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This was withdrawn in 1992 amid concerns over its potential long-term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.”

<<< 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