NPR Reports On Vaccine Court

The Office of Special Masters of the United States Court of Federal Claims, or as it is commonly referred to as the “Vaccine Court”, has been in the news recently. This little-known Court handles all vaccine-related injury claims in the United States. Created in 1986, the Court is tasked with finding if an injury is related to a vaccine, and then determining the amount of compensation.

The process was intended to be more non-adversarial than our traditional civil courts, but in practice, it mirrors our civil courts more than it should. A petitioner’s burden of proof is a ‘preponderance of the evidence’ standard- meaning it is more likely than not that the vaccine caused the claimed injury. Getting a medical professional to testify to this is often difficult.

NPR this month published two pieces on the Court and the hardships faced for those who are not afforded justice. Receiving just compensation for injuries is a steep mountain to climb for those who are injured.

To read the articles, click here and here.

Booth Samuels is admitted to practice in the Federal Claims Court where he handles vaccine-related injury cases. If you or a loved one were injured by a vaccine, please contact him for a case evaluation toll-free at 1-866-515-8880, or by email at booths@pittmandutton.com. 

Claims Against Taishan Continuing

This week, Judge Fallon heard arguments for and against certifying a class for damages against one of the Chinese manufacturers of corrosive drywall. The manufacturer is Taishan, a Chinese company believed to be mostly owned by the Chinese government. Recovering from Chinese companies has been extremely difficult for American consumers.

Litigation has been ongoing over the last six years, and Taishan has for the most part been an absentee party. Unlike homes with Knauf-manufactured drywall, where Knauf paid to remediate, homes containing Taishan drywall have been unremediated-unless the homeowner paid out of pocket for the repairs.

For more on the story, click here.

Power Morcellators: Insurance Companies No Longer Covering the Procedures

Aetna, the nation's third-largest health insurer, announced that as of May 15, it will curb coverage of laparoscopic power morcellation in hysterectomies or for removing uterine fibroids "because the safety and efficacy of this approach has not been demonstrated." The procedure involves using a tube shaped tool to remove uterine fibroids or the entire uterus in less-invasive surgeries than standard abdominal procedures. Surgeons use the tools to grind and shred uterine tissue so it can be removed through a small incision in the abdomen.

Aetna will make limited exceptions for the procedure including for pre-menopausal women who want to maintain their fertility and for those that other treatment would be a life threatening risk.

The danger is that occasionally, a cancerous growth is undetected and seemingly benign when it is removed. Slicing up the growth into small pieces could disperse cancerous flesh in a woman's body, decreasing the likelihood a woman could survive the cancer in the long run.

In November of 2014, the FDA issued a warning against using laparoscopic power morcellators in removing a uterus or removal of fibroids. In its warning, the FDA estimated one in 350 women undergoing hysterectomy or myomectomy for the treatment of fibroids has "unsuspected uterine sarcoma," a type of cancer that appears to be a benign growth.

Some regional health insurers have stopped covering hysterectomies and myomectomies by power morcellation altogether. For example, Blue Cross Blue Shield in Massachusetts stopped covering the procedures on September 1, 2014.

A number of lawsuits have been filed throughout the country on behalf of women who claim to have been injured by this procedure. An MDL has not been set up yet, but depending on if the number of filed claims grows, one could be on the horizon. A number of different pharmaceutical companies who manufacture morcellators including Johnson & Johnson, Richard Wolf Medical Instruments, and Gyrus ACMI have been named as defendants.