Hazlehurst v. Secretary of Health & Human Services

In February 2001, William Yates Hazlehurst (Yates) received the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine three days before his first birthday. Though Yates had developed normally prior to the vaccination, by the summer of 2001 he had developed developmental and gastrointestinal issues. In July 2002, Yates was diagnosed with autism. Rolf and Angela Hazlehurst (plaintiffs), Yates’s parents, sought compensation for Yates under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (act) for a neurological injury identified as autism. The case was one of three test cases heard by the Office of Special Masters as part of the Omnibus Autism Proceeding, a global effort to determine whether there was a relationship between the MMR vaccine and autism. The Hazlehursts asserted that (1) the measles component of the MMR vaccine could cause an immune dysfunction in certain children that impeded their systems from clearing the measles virus, (2) the persisting measles virus led to chronic inflammation in the gastrointestinal system and the brain, and (3) the inflammation in the brain caused neurological damage that manifested as autism. Based on assessment of the evidence, the special master observed that the Hazlehursts’ expert witness based his opinions on studies that had been widely discredited in the scientific community or that contained procedural flaws that compromised the studies’ reliability. The special master thus found the studies to be scientifically flawed or unreliable. The special master held (1) that the Hazlehursts’ theory of causation was premised on a series of biological implausibilities and was at variance with the known science and (2) that the presented evidence did not support a logical sequence of cause and effect between the vaccine and the injury. Consequently, the special master denied Yates compensation under the act. The Hazlehursts sought review of the special master’s decision.