HC Deb 20 May 1976 vol 911 cc718-21W
Mr. Ashley

asked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) what is his estimate of the number of children now suffering vaccine damage; and how many have been injured in each of the last 20 years;

(2) how many children have died as a result of vaccine damage in each of the last 20 years;

(3) if he will outline the steps he has taken to obtain national data on the number of children who have been vaccine damaged in each of the last 20 years; and whether he is satisfied with the results;

(4) how often, and on which dates in the last 20 years, his Department has discussed with the medical profession the statistical risks of vaccine damage;

(5) how often, and on which dates in the last 20 years, his Department has stated publicly that to be unvaccinated is to be at risk:

(6) if he is satisfied that the medical profession explains the dangers for children who have not been vaccinated and the degree of risk involved in vaccination;

(7) what study he has made of the compensation schemes in other countries for children who are vaccine damaged; and what conclusions he has reached;

(8) what consideration he has given to the problems of vaccine-damaged children; and what conclusions he has reached about awarding them compensation for the injuries they have suffered;

(9) if he accepts that some risk, however slight, is involved in the vaccination of children damaged by vaccines;

(10) what plans he has for setting up a compensation scheme for children damaged by vaccines;

(11) whether he expects children suffering from vaccine damage to be called upon to prove negligence before claiming compensation for their injuries;

(12) if, in any compensation scheme, he foresees any difficulties in the assessment of payment to children who have different disabilities as a result of vaccine damage;

(13) what criteria he uses in the assessment of payment to workers suffering from industrial injuries who have different disabilities: and if the same criteria would be applicable to assessing the disabilities of vaccine-damaged children;

(14) if he is satisfied that the information he receives from the medical profession is adequate to make reliable estimates of the number of adverse reactions in children who have been vaccinated;

(15) if it is his policy that all the facts about the vaccination of children should be made public;

(16) if he will set up a special medical panel to assess the injuries to children who have been damaged by vaccination and to adjudicate on whether the injuries were caused by vaccination.

Mr. Alfred Morris

Vaccination publicity is essentially a matter for individual doctors, the area health authorities and the Health Education Council. There is some slight risk in any vaccination procedure. Guidance issued to the medical profession covers this, but it is a matter for clinical judgment how much warning should be given to a patient on any particular occasion. My right hon. Friend is in constant touch with expert medical opinion in this field through the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, the Committee on Safety of Medicines and other bodies.

In my reply to the hon. Member for Eastleigh (Mr. Price) on 4th November 1975—[Vol. 899, c. 99–100.]—I explained that information supplied by medical practitioners about illness following vaccination is held in a form suitable for detailed analysis of the effects of particular vaccines, rather than for the compilation of aggregate data. Data derived from this information, which relates only to cases reported, would be misleading. The information we have indicates that in the great majority of cases the illness was transient and often minor and no permanent damage would have ensued. Current research schemes are seeking to supplement existing information on incidence of adverse reactions to certain vaccines. It is not, however, possible to make reliable estimates at the present time of the overall incidence of adverse reactions to vaccines generally.

The Royal Commission on Compensation and Civil Liability is currently considering the question of compensation for vaccine damage, and I am unable to comment on the merits or procedures of particular schemes, or on possible developments, in advance of its report. I have personally studied schemes in other countries, particularly the no-fault liability scheme now operating in new Zealand. The criteria for assessing disablement from industrial injuries are set out in the Social Security (Industrial Injuries) (Benefit) Regulations 1975.

My hon. Friend will know that the full range of services and benefits available under the National Health Service and the social security system is available to the families of those concerned. Parents can also apply for help to the Family Fund administered by the Rowntree Memorial Trust, to which a further grant of £2.5 million was recently made. The fund's guidlines have been amended, under the present Government, to allow for help to non-congenitally handicapped children including vaccine damaged children.