This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Max Bader, MD, MPH
Seattle

JAMA. 1985;253(15):2191.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

The recommendations for vaccine injury compensation published in the Dec 7 issue of THE JOURNAL¹ are both necessary and generally sound. All claims of injury should first be funneled through a no-fault federal compensation program. However, when the claimant finds the disposition of his claim by the program to be unsatisfactory, there probably deserves to be a limited appeals process involving petition for a rehearing or appeal to a federal court, where a contention as to fact could be heard by a judge without jury. This is most apt to be needed when a claim is turned down.

In addition, health insurers should not be permitted to exclude these injuries from medical care coverage, and compensation should be limited to cases of serious injury only to the extent that a family's health insurance does not provide such coverage. Pain and suffering compensation should be excluded. In . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Footnotes
Edited by Drummond Rennie, MD, Senior Contributing Editor.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?