Dr Marco Rizzi1, Dr Shevaun Drislane1
1University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
Biography:
Marco teaches Torts, Health Law & Policy, and Risk Regulation. His research interests include the policy and regulation of therapeutic goods, medical liability, vaccine policy and regulation, risk and regulatory theory, and law & technology. He is currently CI in two MRFF projects on vaccine mandates and genomic data governance.
Dr Marco Rizzi, University of Western Australia Law School
Dr Shevaun Drislane, University of Western Australia School of Social Sciences
Abstract:
Vaccine injuries are rare, but potentially serious. To support injured parties, many OECD countries have adopted no-fault compensation schemes (NFCS); however, Australia is a noticeable outlier to this. While justification for these schemes is uncontroversially anchored in ethical and policy rationales of mutualsim, fairness, welfarism, and solidarity, key pieces of evidence are missing. The gap encompasses research on the effectiveness of schemes (which can take many forms and significantly vary on key aspects such as elegibility criteria, procedural expediency, causal requirements etc.) and their impact on broader public health matters (chiefly immunsation policies and vaccine attitudes, trust, and acceptance). This paper outlines a research agenda aimed at addressing this gap, with a focus on Australia.
The COVID-19 pandemic saw the fast-tracked approval and mass rollout of a number of novel vaccines. The need for prompt, widespread community uptake, and early reportings of rare but severe adverse reactions to mRNA vaccines, pushed Australia to enact a limited NFCS specific to COVID-19 vaccines. As the scheme comes to an end in September 2024, this paper takes the opportunity to reflect critically on its operation and raises broader questions on the possibility of establishing a permanent NFCS for vaccine injuries more broadly. Early data stemming from a freedom of information request suggest mixed results for the scheme, and the need for in-depth systemic research to ensure that the future adoption of (or indeed decision not to implement) a NFCS for vaccine injuries in Australia, and with what structure, is fully informed.