Mirena IUD Lawsuit Claims
A growing number of Mirena IUD lawsuit claims have been filed on behalf of young women who suffered serious injuries, due to Mirena’s alleged propensity to spontaneously migrate and perforate the uterus. Many of the women at the center of these Mirena lawsuits claim that their lives, including their reproductive health and fertility, were forever changed as a result of their injuries. If you had a similar experience, filing an IUD lawsuit against the manufacturer of Mirena could help you obtain compensation for your medical bills, lost wages, and pain and suffering. If you or a loved one were harmed by Mirena, and would like to learn more about your legal options, please contact a lawyer today for an evaluation of your case.
Mirena Lawsuit Allegations
Introduced in 2000, the Mirena IUD is now approved as a long-acting method of contraception, as well as a treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding in women who wish to use an IUD as their primary method of birth control. The device is designed to be implanted in a woman’s uterus, where it can remain for up to five years, releasing a low dose of Levonorgestrel, a synthetic progestin. It’s not clear how Mirena works, but according to Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, it may prevent pregnancy by thickening cervical mucus; thinning the uterine lining; and preventing sperm from reaching an egg.
Today, it is estimated that some 2 million U.S. women now use Mirena, and their numbers are climbing. Mirena IUD lawsuits allege that Bayer has driven sales of the device by marketing it as an ideal method of birth control for so-called “busy moms.” However, these IUD lawsuits also point out that in 2009, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) issued a warning letter to Bayer after finding that a Mirena marketing campaign targeted to this audience made claims that were misleading. Among other things, the FDA said that Bayer understated serious Mirena complications, and it took issue with promises that using Mirena could improve a woman’s sex life and help her “look and feel great.”
Women in IUD lawsuits involving injuries allegedly caused by Mirena claim that Bayer failed to warn that the device could spontaneously migrate and puncture the uterus long after it had been properly positioned in a woman’s body. Instead, Mirena lawsuits allege that Bayer only warns that uterine perforations may occur upon insertion of the IUD. Plaintiffs further claim that they have suffered a variety of serious and life-altering complications due to this type of IUD migration, including:
- Abscesses and infections
- Scarring and adhesions
- Uterine perforations and embedment
- Intestinal perforations or obstruction
- Damage to other organs
- Ectopic pregnancy
- Pelvic inflammatory disease
According to Mirena lawsuits, these types of complications often require that a woman undergo a difficult surgical procedure to locate and remove the IUD. And even then, they may continue to suffer from permanent injures that will have long-term consequences for their health and fertility. Data obtained from the FDA in 2013 added credence to these claims, with the agency’s adverse event database showing that Mirena had been implicated in some 70,000 injury reports since its launch in 2000.Thousands of these reports detailed instances where Mirena may have spontaneously migrated and perforated the uterus, many of which echo allegations put forth in Mirena lawsuits.
Mirena IUD Lawsuit 2013
IUD lawsuits involving Mirena really began to gain momentum in 2013.That year two consolidated litigations were established to handle Mirena complaints, one in New Jersey Superior Court, and another in U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York. As of August 2013,123 Mirena IUD lawsuits had been filed in the federal proceeding underway in New York, while at least 180 were pending in the New Jersey State litigation. All of the lawsuits filed in these proceedings are individual claims, rather than Mirena class action lawsuits. Unlike a Mirena class action, individual filings will allow each plaintiff to pursue a level of compensation appropriate to their damages.
The consolidated litigations moving forward in New Jersey and New York will provide for a more efficient means of prosecuting Mirena lawsuits, which some legal experts believe will eventually number in the thousands. The consolidations will preserve the resources of the court, witnesses and parties by allowing for coordinated pretrial proceedings, including discovery and motions practice. But unlike a Mirena class action, each lawsuit filed on behalf of an individual plaintiff will retain its own identity, and be evaluated on its own merits. Any Mirena IUD lawsuit not resolved in the course of these proceedings will be returned to its original court of filing for trial.