Mirena IUD Lawsuit Mirena Birth Control IUD Recall Lawsuit

 

Mirena IUD Perforation Defect IUD Birth Control Lawsuit

IUD Lawsuit Mirena Birth Control IUD Side Effects RecallOn December 17, 2012, a Kentucky woman filed a Mirena IUD birthe control lawsuit against Bayer, alleging that the defective design of the contraceptive device caused it to migrate from its place of implant that resulted in acute abdominal pain and other health problems. She had to undergo surgery to remove the Mirena birth control IUD device located at the right posterior. Three similar Mirena IUD lawsuits filed in November 2012 by women from Florida, Ohio, and California claimed that the plaintiffs suffered from uterine wall perforation following the migration of intrauterine contraceptives they were implanted with. The women had to undergo hysterectomy to remove the birth control devices and suffered from no-viable pregnancy.

These lawsuits are part of dozens of product liability litigations filed across the United States alleging injuries and serious health problems caused by the Mirena IUD. All such claims belittle insistence of the manufacturer that the contraceptive is safer and hassle free to be inserted directly into the uterus, where it remains in place and prevents pregnancy for up to five years.

What is Mirena IUD? Why Are These Birth Control Lawsuit Cases Being Filed?

IUD Lawsuit Mirena Birth Control IUD Side Effects RecallThe T-shaped Mirena IUD manufactured by Bayer was first introduced in 2000. It contains levonorgestrel hormone, synthetic progestogen. The IUD device slowly releases the hormone into the uterus, preventing fertilization of eggs and unwanted pregnancy. In 2009, the FDA approved it as a treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding. However, the number of rising complaints and Mirena IUD lawsuits about uterus perforation, device migration, contraceptive failure and pelvic injuries has casted serious apprehensions on its safety and efficacy. The medical fraternity also disapproves of its use by women who are not pregnant and remains unconvinced about claims that it has no side effects.


Mirena IUD Birth Control Side Effect Lawsuits And IUD Warnings

A report submitted at the American Public Health Association meet in San Francisco toward the end of October 2012 claimed that the majority of healthcare professionals practicing in the United States did not consider Mirena IUD a safe and effective contraceptive. Many of them interviewed during the study expressed concern over IUD migration and uterine perforation. Though the manufacturer-sponsored studies have recommended the devices for use by all women, doctors are not willing to accept it as a safe alternative to prevent pregnancy.

The study found that doctors were worried over side effects of the birth control device, such as early child birth, risk of abortion, miscarriages, and pelvic injuries. Many of them out rightly rejected its use by women not yet pregnant or those who have had delivered a baby a few weeks ago.

Mayo Clinic website warns that Mirena IUD users are likely to suffer from pelvic infection, mood swing, acne, heavy menstrual bleeding, irregular menstrual, and ovarian cysts. According to the website, the contraceptive poses increased risk for women with high blood pressure, menstrual pain, without children, and suffering from pelvic problems, and also younger women.

In March 2012, the Obstetrics & Gynecology journal reported about widespread concern among gynecologists and obstetricians over Mirena birth control IUD side effects. The report, based on a study commissioned by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, highlighted that more than 60 percent of 2,000 doctors interviewed preferred to suggest use of the contraceptive only occasionally and that too only to those favoring it over other alternatives. The study also found that at least 30 percent rejected its benefit claims, saying that it was not safe and should never prescribed to women who are yet to have children.

A number of post-marketing surveys have also identified sepsis, pelvic abscesses, device migration leading to uterus perforation, ovarian cysts, ectopic pregnancy, menstrual problems, and back pain in women using Mirena IUD or those who have already used the contraceptive.


FDA Warning on Mirena IUD Side Effects

The FDA warns against the use of Mirena contraceptive by the women yet IUD Lawsuit Mirena Birth Control IUD Side Effects Recallto conceive, fearing uterine infection and pelvic problems. In October 2009, the federal regulator admitted that it had received dozens of complaints from Mirena birth control users through its adverse event reporting system. The most common Mirena side effect reports were about uterine perforation, ectopic pregnancy, pregnancy-related problems, vaginitis, streptococcal sepsis, ovarian cysts, and cervical pain.

In December 2009, the FDA warned manufacturer Bayer to stop ads that promoted the Mirena IUD as a safer contraceptive and did not inform consumers about its possible side effects. The contraceptive was one of the targets when the FDA launched its “Bad Ad Program” to censure misrepresenting promotions by drug manufacturers.


Mirena Birth Control IUD Side Effects

  • Device Migration and Perforation: Mirena IUD, in contrast to claims by the manufacturer, is often found to migrate from the uterus, which can cause perforation of the uterine wall, ovary, the fallopian tube, and other pelvic organs. Many users had to undergo hysterectomy and other surgeries to remove the IUD displaced to abdominal or posterior.
  • Abdominal Problems and Device Failure: The migration of Mirena IUD also leads to its failure, putting the users at the risk of unwanted pregnancy. It can also cause consistent abdominal pain, internal injuries, pelvic pain, and injuries and damage to the uterus.
  • Uterine Problems: Women using the Mirena IUD face the increased risk of side effects that affect the uterus. Many of them were forced to undergo hysterectomy following uterine infections, persistent uterine inflammation, and uterine wall perforations.
  • Menstrual Problems: Mirena IUD side effects result in heavy menstrual bleeding, short and irregular menstrual cycles, and menstrual pattern change within weeks of using the device. Spotting or no periods usually appears following six months of using the contraceptive.
  • Vaginal Infection: Vaginitis, vaginal bleeding, and streptococcal sepsis in women are also linked to the use of Mirena IUD. The users are also at the risk of suffering from dysmenorrheal, vaginal watery discharge, and pain during sex.
  • Pelvic Inflammation: Those already facing pelvic problems are advised against using Mirena IUD. While the device migration causes injuries to the pelvic floor and organs, its implant puts women at the increased risk of infection, inflammation, and abscesses at the pelvic area leading to pelvic diseases. Those suffered from pelvic diseases caused by Mirena had no option but to undergo surgeries.
  • Ovarian Cysts: Levonorgestrel hormone in Mirena IUD is linked to the formation of painful ovarian cysts in women using the contraceptive. Disproportionate release of the hormone puts one in every eight users at the increased risk of ovarian cysts, which can cause pain during sex and pelvic inflammation.
  • Ectopic Pregnancy: The FDA has warned that the Mirena side effects result in ectopic pregnancy in users where fertilization occurs outside the uterus. It clearly indicates that the IUD is not completely effective in preventing pregnancy.
  • Pregnancy Complications: Doctors have advised women who are yet not pregnant or those who have given birth a few weeks ago to refrain from using Mirena IUD. There have been complaints of miscarriage, early child birth, abortion, and other pregnancy-related complications in women who use the IUD to prevent unwanted pregnancy.
 

Mirena IUD Side Effects IUD Recall Lawsuit


IUD Lawsuit Mirena Birth Control IUD Side Effects RecallBayer is facing a number of Mirena IUD lawsuits, citing product liability, introduction of defective contraceptive leading to injury, failure to inform consumers about its side effects, false promotion, and selling dangerous products for commercial gain at the cost of the users. A motion for Mirena IUD lawsuits consolidation has also been filed at the New Jersey Superior Court.


A Virginia woman sued Bayer and the Blue Ridge Gynecology and Obstetrics PC in October 2011 seeking $2 million as compensation for her sufferings caused by the Mirena IUD migration. The Mirena lawsuit filed at the Winchester Circuit Court alleged that the plaintiff experienced severe abdominal pain within months of using the IUD. Doctors found that she had an ectopic pregnancy and the device was floating in her abdomen. The plaintiff had to undergo surgery to remove the Mirena IUD.

In May 2012, two women from Ohio and Oklahoma filed Mirena IUD perforation lawsuits at a Morris County court, citing injuries they suffered because of the device migration. They had to undergo hysterectomy following severe pelvic infections and uterine injuries caused by the contraceptive device. In November 2012, a 21-year-old Ohio woman filed a similar complaint. The Mirena IUD perforation caused her uterus to be removed and she cannot be a mother again. Two more such Mirena IUD perforation lawsuits, one by a California woman, and another by a Florida woman, were filed by the end of the month.

A 24-year-old New Jersey woman filed a Mirena IUD lawsuit against Bayer in July 2012, holding it responsible for the device failure and her injuries. The device migration made the plaintiff suffer from acute abdominal and pelvic pain and failed to prevent her unwanted pregnancy.


Other Birth Control Calss Action Lawsuit and IUD Lawsuits

The IUDs, both hormonal and nonhormonal copper, first hit the US market in the 1970s. At least 15 drug manufacturers worked on developing 17 IUDs. However, the industry had its first bruise with trouble when more than 300,000 lawsuits were filed, citing injury caused by the Dalkon Shield IUD, manufactured by Dalkon and A. H. Robins. The amount of award, nearly $3 billion, forced A.H. Robins to seek bankruptcy protection in 1985. American Home Products, who acquired the company, paid each claimant between $21,000 and $2.2 million based on the level of injury following 15 year of litigation. The lawsuits were filed following uterine bleeding, abdominal pain, device failure, spontaneous septic abortion, and 18 deaths linked to the IUD.

In June 1989, G. D. Searle & Co settled more than 100 of about 600 product liability lawsuits filed by women who suffered because of its Copper-7 IUD contraceptive. It included $8 million to a Minneapolis woman and $300,000 to two others. The IUD introduced in 1974 was linked to uterine perforation, ectopic pregnancy, infertility, and pelvic infections in users. The manufacturer withdrew the device in January 1986.

The ParaGard IUD is also subject of many complaints related to its failure, migration, and other side effects. Lawyers across the United States are evaluating consumer claims to file claims for injuries caused by the copper IUD.


If You Or A Loved One Has Have Been Implanted With The Mirena IUD, Please Feel Free To Contact Us For A Free Case Review.