2008•University of North Carolina School of Law Scholarship Repository (University of North Carolina Hospitals)Open access

Markovich v. Secretary of Health and Human Services: An Ounce of Cure for a Pound of Prevention

J. Hunter Appler

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

There's an old saying that "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." Vaccinations seem to exemplify this, allowing people to avoid diseases entirely by submitting to a simple injection, rather than forcing them to worry about the more difficult alternative of treating the disease once it is contracted.Markovich v. Secretary of Health and Human Services is a case in which an infant suffered severe injuries resulting from a vaccination.To address such rare situations, the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act establishes a system through which injured parties may recover medical costs from the government.This Recent Development examines a failure of that system to serve its intended purpose.It looks at ways in which the court's decision in Markovich runs counter to the policies underlying the creation of the system.It also considers the court's erroneous interpretation of statutory language and the injustice of denying compensation to infants injured by vaccines that results from this misapplication.Markovich illustrates how the few children injured by vaccines may be offered precious little financial restitution for the unintended consequence of a technology that keeps the rest of us healthy.1

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

There's an old saying that "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." Vaccinations seem to exemplify this, allowing people to avoid diseases entirely by submitting to a simple injection, rather than forcing them to worry about the more difficult alternative of treating the disease once it is contracted.Markovich v. Secretary of Health and Human Services is a case in which an infant suffered severe injuries resulting from a vaccination.To address such rare situations, the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act establishes a system through which injured parties may recover medical costs from the government.This Recent Development examines a failure of that system to serve its intended purpose.It looks at ways in which the court's decision in Markovich runs counter to the policies underlying the creation of the system.It also considers the court's erroneous interpretation of statutory language and the injustice of denying compensation to infants injured by vaccines that results from this misapplication.Markovich illustrates how the few children injured by vaccines may be offered precious little financial restitution for the unintended consequence of a technology that keeps the rest of us healthy.1

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

There's an old saying that "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." Vaccinations seem to exemplify this, allowing people to avoid diseases entirely by submitting to a simple injection, rather than forcing them to worry about the more difficult alternative of treating the disease once it is contracted.Markovich v. Secretary of Health and Human Services is a case in which an infant suffered severe injuries resulting from a vaccination.To address such rare situations, the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act establishes a system through which injured parties may recover medical costs from the government.This Recent Development examines a failure of that system to serve its intended purpose.It looks at ways in which the court's decision in Markovich runs counter to the policies underlying the creation of the system.It also considers the court's erroneous interpretation of statutory language and the injustice of denying compensation to infants injured by vaccines that results from this misapplication.Markovich illustrates how the few children injured by vaccines may be offered precious little financial restitution for the unintended consequence of a technology that keeps the rest of us healthy.1

Key concepts: Fluid ounce (US), Pound (networking), Law, Art, Political science, Medicine, Computer science, World Wide Web

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Markovich v. Secretary of Health and Human Services: An Ounce of Cure for a Pound of Prevention — Research Paper | ScholarLens