Court rejects state compensation for boy's death after vaccinations

gettyimagesbank

By Jun Ji-hye

A court has ruled against a mother who filed a compensation suit against the state claiming her son had died after being vaccinated against typhoid fever and other diseases upon the request of a school the son entered.

According to legal sources, Monday, the Seoul Administrative Court handed down the ruling, Dec. 8, saying the son was not eligible for state compensation as he was not the subject of the country's compulsory vaccination program.

In 2019, the boy entered an international school operating as a boarding school. The school asked students including the boy to be vaccinated against typhoid fever, hepatitis A and hepatitis B before moving into the boarding quarters in order to prevent the possible transmission of infectious diseases on the premises.

Following the guidelines, the boy was vaccinated in January of the same year.

Six months later, he died in his home. The autopsy report by the National Forensic Service said he died of an unknown cause.

In November 2021, his mother asked the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency (KDCA) to pay compensation to the boy's family members, claiming that her son had died because of the vaccinations.

The mother cited the Infectious Disease Control and Prevention Act, but the KDCA rejected her application, saying that the boy's case did not meet the standard to qualify for state compensation. This led her to file an administrative lawsuit.

During trials, the mother claimed the vaccines her son received should be seen as part of the compulsory vaccination program as those vaccines were administered upon the compulsion of the school.

But the court rejected this, saying, although typhoid fever, hepatitis A and hepatitis B vaccines were within the compulsory vaccination program, he was not in the age range to receive the vaccinations.

According to the Infectious Disease Control and Prevention Act, infants and toddlers aged between 12 months and 23 months are required to be vaccinated against hepatitis A, while all infants are required to be vaccinated against hepatitis B.

For typhoid fever, the law stipulates that those who have had close contact with carriers or those who have traveled to infected areas are required to receive vaccinations.

“He was not an infant or toddler, both of whom are subject to compulsory vaccination against hepatitis A. There was no objective evidence showing that he was vaccinated against hepatitis B, either,” the court said in its ruling.

“He was not in the age band for those vaccinations, so they cannot be seen to be within in the country's compulsory vaccination program.”

The court continued that he could not be seen as qualifying for the typhoid fever vaccination under the government program, either, although the school asked students to be vaccinated against typhoid fever because of the risk of infection due to frequent exchanges between international students.

This case will move to a higher court as the mother has lodged an appeal.