美国最高法院难断疫苗诉讼案（U.S. Supreme Court to Decide on Vaccine Suits）

Source http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/730418 U.S. Supreme Court to Decide on Vaccine Suits By Maggie Fox WASHINGTON (Reuters) Oct 12 - The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on Tuesday in a case that could shake up protections aimed at keeping vaccine makers in business and potentially open the door for a flood of lawsuits. 美国最高法院将在10月12日举行听证会，就疫苗诉讼案广泛听取意见，该诉讼案件将可能撼动政府对疫苗生产厂家的保护，因为一直以来正是有了政府的保护措施，疫苗生产厂家才敢也才会去生产疫苗。这个案件开创了疫苗诉讼的先河，今后将可能出现大量类似的疫苗诉讼案件。 The case was brought by the parents of Hannah Bruesewitz, now 18, who suffered seizures as an infant after her third dose in 1992 of a diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP) vaccine, one of the regular childhood vaccines. 这次诉讼案的原告是现年18岁的少女Hannah Bruesewitz的父母。白喉-破伤风-百日咳三联疫苗疫苗（DTP）本是儿童时期常规使用的一种疫苗，但在1992年还是婴儿的Hannah Bruesewitz在接受了白喉-破伤风-百日咳三联疫苗疫苗（DTP）的三次接种后患上了癫痫。 Normally, such cases are referred to a special no-fault program that compensates people harmed by vaccines. That court found against Russell and Robalee Bruesewitz, who then sued the vaccine manufacturer, Wyeth, now owned by Pfizer Inc, in state court. 一般来说，这样的案例应该归类到专门的无过错项目里面，该项目会对那些因接种疫苗而受到伤害的人进行赔偿。Hannah Bruesewitz的父母Russell 和 Robalee Bruesewitz在州法院对DTP三联疫苗的生产商Wyeth制药公司（现在已被辉瑞制药公司收购）进行了上诉，但法院发现该案的案情对原告Russell 和 Robalee Bruesewitz是非常不利的。 The Bruesewitz family and their supporters say parents of children who believe they are injured by vaccines need an alternate route to the no-fault court and say the threat of lawsuits will keep vaccine makers honest. Bruesewitz一家和他们的支持者都称，孩子的父母也受到了疫苗所带来的伤害，通过这样的迂回方式，受到伤害的父母就可以向不追究过失责任的法院再次提起诉讼，并且还称，法律诉讼将会使那些疫苗生产厂家变得真诚以保证疫苗质量。 The federal government, vaccine makers and doctor's groups say suits such as this one threatened to drive vaccine makers out of business before and could do so again. 联邦政府、疫苗生产商和医生团体都表示，类似的上诉案件让疫苗生产商承担了很大的风险，因此，在以前，一旦有很多被诉，疫苗生产商就会停止生产，那么在现在，这样的事情同样可能会重演。 At issue is the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. 1986年制定的《国家儿童疫苗伤害法案》引起了很多的争议，该法案在接受进一步的审议。 Congress passed the law to prevent repeated lawsuits against vaccine makers, while at the same time providing compensation for children who really are injured by vaccines. 国会通过这一法案是为了防止对疫苗生产商的反复诉讼，与此同时对那些的确受到疫苗伤害的儿童提供一些补偿。 The Vaccine Court set up by the law has awarded more than $1.8 billion in nearly 2,500 cases, with an average award per case of about $750,000. 应法案的要求成立了专门处理疫苗案件的法庭，该法庭处理了大约2500件疫苗事故案，赔偿了大约18亿美元，平均每件案子的赔偿金额大约是75万美元。 It is funded by a tax on vaccines and parents do not have to prove a vaccine caused their child's injury - they usually just have to show the child had an injury that can be caused by the vaccine. 这些赔偿所需的资金是通过对疫苗征税获得的，父母不必提供直接证据来证明他们孩子所遭受的伤害是由疫苗导致的，通常情况下他们仅仅需要表明他们孩子所遭受的伤害可能是由疫苗导致的。 Hannah's parents say she was a healthy infant until she got the third dose of DTP vaccine. They say the vaccine has an outmoded and flawed design and contained toxins that caused the seizures. Hannah的父母称，在第三次注射DTP疫苗之前Hannah Bruesewitz一直都是个健康的孩子。他们说这个疫苗的结构设计已经过时了并且还存在缺陷，该疫苗中含有毒素，它能导致癫痫。 "Now a teenager, Hannah suffers from residual seizure disorder and remains developmentally impaired. She will require a lifetime of supervision and care," their written arguments read. 他们在提交的书面证据中写道：“一直到现在，已经长成为青少年的Hannah还在遭受着癫痫所遗留下来的功能障碍，并且还在进行性地受到伤害，她的一生都需要监理和照顾。” They argue that Wyeth knew the vaccine was old-fashioned and dangerous. The vaccine was taken off the market in 1998 and replaced. 他们辩论称，Wyeth制药公司知道这种疫苗已经过时并且存在危险。在1998年该疫苗撤离市场并且被其他的疫苗制品所取代。 Pfizer argues that there was no safer alternative at the time and notes the vaccine court heard the Bruesewitz case, decided Hannah was not injured by the vaccine, but nonetheless gave the family $126,000 for expenses. 辉瑞制药公司辩解道，在当时还没有研制出更为安全的替代疫苗，并且指出疫苗事故处理法庭也已经审理了Bruesewitz这起案件，虽然当时宣判Hannah所遭受的疾病伤害并不是由疫苗引起的，但还是给予了Hannah Bruesewitz一家12.6万美元的赔偿。 The company, other vaccine makers and doctors groups argue that if the Supreme Court decides families such as the Bruesewitz family can sue outside the vaccine court, a flood of new suits would follow - many by families who believe that vaccines cause autism. Wyeth制药公司、其他的疫苗生产商和医生团体都辩论称，如果最高法院裁决像Bruesewitz这样受到疫苗伤害的家庭可以在疫苗事故专门处理法庭以外的其他地方进行诉讼的话，那么将会有很多的疫苗诉讼案如潮水般接踵而至，很多相信疫苗会导致孤独症的家庭都会提起上诉，这将会占所有疫苗诉讼案件的很大一部分。 Many studies have shown vaccines do not cause autism but a small and vocal group of people continue to believe, and try to show, that they do. They have 5,000 suits pending. 很多研究都已经表明，疫苗不会导致孤独症，但是仍然有一小部分人对此坚信不已并到处宣扬，试图想证明疫苗确实能导致孤独症。还有5000起这样的类似案件等待着裁决。 The American Academy of Pediatrics, American Medical Association, March of Dimes and other groups said the vaccine court was set up after an onslaught of lawsuits threatened to overwhelm vaccine makers in the 1980s. 美国儿科学会、美国医学会、美国出生缺陷基金会和其他的组织团体称，在20世纪80年代一连串的疫苗诉讼案席卷而来，几乎可以让当时的那些疫苗生产厂家倒闭，在此之后才成立了专门处理疫苗案件的法庭。 "A genuine threat to the public health emerged as manufacturers abandoned or considered abandoning the vaccine market," they said in a friend-of-the-court brief. 他们在“法庭之友”案情摘要中称：“当制药厂商放弃或者考虑放弃疫苗市场的时候，那时对公共卫生的威胁就会真正的显现出来。” The high court is expected to rule by mid-2011. 美国最高法院预期于2011年中期裁决此案.