{
  "id": "R41538",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "R41538",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 391630,
      "date": "2011-10-06",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-07T00:31:21.152706",
      "title": "The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act and Preemption: An Overview of Bruesewitz v. Wyeth",
      "summary": "While recent scientific publications have declared that there appears to be no link between immunizations and autism or other serious medical problems, a recent Journal of Pediatrics survey of parents with children between the ages of six months and six years old reveals that about 13% of parents used a vaccination plan that varied from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-recommended schedule, because of concerns that receiving multiple vaccinations in a short span of time is less safe than delaying certain vaccines. Whether parents follow the government-recommended schedule or an alternative schedule, should their child suffer harm after receiving a vaccination, they must first seek relief through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.\nOn February 22, 2011, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, a case involving the scope of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. The Supreme Court considered whether 42 U.S.C. Section 300aa-22(b)(1) of the act precludes all vaccine design defect claims even if the vaccine\u2019s side effects were avoidable, or whether the vaccine manufacturer has to show on a case-by-case basis that the side effects could not have been avoided by some alternatively designed vaccine. Both parties had fundamentally differing interpretations of the statute\u2019s text and of Congress\u2019s intent behind the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. This report provides an overview of the structure of the Vaccine Act and the relevant facts of the Bruesewitz case. It then examines the opinions of the lower court and the Supreme Court decision. Lastly, this report analyzes the impact of the decision both in terms of its potential effect on preemption jurisprudence and ongoing vaccine litigation. It also discusses past congressional legislation related to the Vaccine Injury Act.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R41538",
          "sha1": "3264b8519feca3d8ba66332b02dcb704eeb1328b",
          "filename": "files/20111006_R41538_3264b8519feca3d8ba66332b02dcb704eeb1328b.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R41538",
          "sha1": "ed9d6e78379cb05ed3cf4797c66ae78447f5405b",
          "filename": "files/20111006_R41538_ed9d6e78379cb05ed3cf4797c66ae78447f5405b.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    },
    {
      "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
      "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc806850/",
      "id": "R41538_2010Dec20",
      "date": "2010-12-20",
      "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26",
      "title": "The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act and Preemption: An Overview of Bruesewitz v. Wyeth",
      "summary": null,
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORT",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "filename": "files/20101220_R41538_3c03cc614285ca9fe9d296039326c6a6057f6309.pdf"
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20101220_R41538_3c03cc614285ca9fe9d296039326c6a6057f6309.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": []
}