A new ruling recognizes the consequences of COVID vaccination as an occupational accident.

BarcelonaIt's been a little less than three months since a pioneering ruling issued in Barcelona recognized the blood clots suffered by a teacher after being vaccinated against COVID with AstraZeneca doses as an occupational accident. Now, the Social Court No. 3 of Burgos has issued a very similar ruling, but with one relevant difference: in this case, the affected woman had received a first dose of AstraZeneca and two of Pfizer.

Both affected women were represented by lawyer Francesc Feliu. In this case, the Burgos judge considers that, in order to assess the relationship between the side effects and her status as an employee—the complainant was a temporary English teacher in Miranda de Ebro—it must be taken into account that the woman "was summoned by the administration to whom she reported hierarchically, without the possibility of choosing a vaccine, at least in the first call, and as a party." In fact, it was the Ministry of Education of the Regional Government of Castilla y León that summoned teachers through the school principals between March and June 2021 to get vaccinated.

The teacher had no relevant medical history and had received her first dose of AstraZeneca at the end of March 2021. About ten days later, she began to feel sensory symptoms in her legs, which prevented her from driving. The emergency room ruled out any urgent thrombotic pathology, but the reports state that she had fever and muscle weakness (asthenia). This episode required a single day of sick leave, one of which the court now recognizes as an occupational disease. The periods from April 13 to 16, 2021, from April 18 to August 3, 2022, and from April 17 to August 17, 2023 are also recognized as occupational pathologies.

Tingling and pain

A month later, a new medical report stated that the woman continued to experience abnormal sensory sensations, tingling or numbness (paresthesia), and stabbing pains in her muscles when walking or holding a specific position, such as driving. Neurologists tried various treatments, and a CT scan found no evidence of any illness.

Subsequently, a private center in Madrid diagnosed her with persistent COVID, considering that the symptoms had begun after receiving the vaccine. Finally, neurologists diagnosed her with probable unmyelinated fiber neuropathy, which has no treatment. Over the following months, the woman returned to the emergency room due to altered sensations.

Months after the first vaccine and all these medical tests, the woman was called back to receive the second dose of the vaccine. At the end of August, she received the vaccine developed in the Pfizer laboratories. In this case, the woman signed an informed consent form to accept vaccination from a different provider.

Getting vaccinated was "an ethical and legal requirement."

For the teacher, the judge adds, there was also "an ethical and legal requirement to protect students' right to health and education," which is why teachers were among the priority groups to receive the vaccine. "It was, therefore, an ethical, moral, professional, and legal obligation for public services to get vaccinated. Responding to the call for vaccination as a collective and professional duty, there was little room for considering it a voluntary act in a climate of unprecedented pandemic," the judge says.

The ruling adds that getting vaccinated had a "close connection with the duties" of workers in relation to following the occupational risk prevention measures established by the employer. "In practice, the vaccine consisted of a necessary occupational preventive measure. A situation that clearly reinforces the connection between vaccination and professional teaching activity," the judge states.