The Eastern Health Board is challenging a decision by the Dublin City Coroner to investigate any role the pertussis or three-in-one vaccine may have played in the death of a young Dublin man four years ago.
The man's family claim he sustained brain damage as a result of receiving the vaccine, while a doctor who treated him claims he died of "aspirational pneumonia due to cerebral palsy".
The inquest into the death of Mr Alan Duffy (22), of Howth Road, Clontarf, has been adjourned since December 1997 in order to conduct medical investigation into the cause of death which has included evidence of an alleged potential link between Mr Duffy and encephalopathy and the application of the pertussis vaccine.
The coroner, Dr Brian Farrell, proposes to reconvene the inquest on April 19th next, when he will recount all the evidence given to date and call another medical witness and other witnesses to answer questions.
The coroner has also written to Glaxo Ireland Ltd inviting it to give evidence about records relating to certain batch numbers used in the three-in-one vaccine administered by the EHB in October 1973.
Mr Duffy died on December 31st, 1995, after contracting pneumonia. He had received the three-in-one vaccine between October 17th, 1973 and February 6th, 1974.
Mr Duffy's family want the inquest to continue. In an affidavit, his mother, Mrs Vera Duffy, said her family believes Mr Duffy suffered massive brain damage as a result of the pertussis vaccine.
"This has been our belief since a bright, smiling, healthy, normal child of five months was transformed into a distressed, remote and profoundly brain-damaged child of 10 months, having received three injections in the intervening period."
Mrs Duffy said her family was unwilling to accept that Mr Duffy's death certificate should record that he suffered from cerebral palsy. "He did not," she said. "He was a perfectly healthy and normal baby until five months of age. He could not therefore have had cerebral palsy.
"To us Alan died when he was given a three-in-one injection. We lost him then. The pneumonia just switched off his miserable existence and suffering that he had endured all his life. We believe we are entitled to know how he became brain-damaged, ultimately causing his death."
She said the matters the coroner is seeking to inquire into were of "immense public importance". The coroner had made clear no question of civil or criminal liability would be considered and she believed the attempt of the EHB to "fetter" the inquest was "simply another obstacle being put in our path to prevent us finding out the truth about what happened to our son".
Mrs Duffy's affidavit was presented to the High Court yesterday at the opening of an action by the EHB against Dr Farrell.
The board wants a declaration that the hearing of the inquest into the death of Mr Duffy, carried out on December 4th, 1997, had breached Section 30 of the Coroners Act 1962, which states that an inquest must be confined to the identity of the deceased, and how, when and where they died.
The board claims it was clear that the answers to those questions were ascertainable from the medical staff involved in the treatment of Mr Duffy.
The circumstances did not warrant an inquiry of the type carried out by the coroner, who had called various medical witnesses to give evidence, the board claims.
The board is also seeking a declaration that the inquest was adjourned for an excessive period - 16 months - as well as an order restraining the coroner from carrying out a general inquiry into the pertussis vaccine in relation to the cause of death of Mr Duffy. It also wants an order to compel Dr Farrell to direct the jury to record a verdict that Mr Duffy died of "aspirational pneumonia".
The board claims it was given no notice of the coroner's proposal to call medical witnesses regarding the pertussis vaccine at the 1997 inquest into Mr Duffy's death and that the inquest was conducted in an unfair and unreasonable manner.
Dr Farrell claims the application was made outside the time limits and that he conducted the inquest within his powers under the Coroners Act.
He said he had not called medical witnesses to inquire into any possible link between the pertussis vaccine and encephalopathy, but had called them to give evidence regarding Mr Duffy's condition and treatment.
He said aspirational pneumonia was a symptom of some medical condition and was not of itself the cause of Mr Duffy's death.
It was not clear at all material times that Mr Duffy died from aspirational pneumonia due to cerebral palsy. He said it was a matter for the jury to decide the outcome of the inquest and, in particular, whether Mr Duffy died of aspirational pneumonia due to cerebral palsy or aspirational pneumonia due to mental handicap caused by the three-in-one pertussis vaccine.
Dr Farrell said one of the factors believed to support a link between the vaccine and encephalopathy was vaccines that came from batches that did not satisfy quality control.
In writing to Glaxo Ireland, he was inquiring into that issue. This was not an unlawful expansion of the inquest.
The hearing, before Mr Justice Geoghegan, continues today.
