Mirena is an intrauterine contraceptive device. Such devices are commonly called IUDs. They seemingly present women with an attractive contraceptive alternative to birth control medication that is easier and effective. However, the Mirena brand of IUD (intrauterine device) can be very dangerous to women: in some cases resulting in death, infertility, or great bodily injury. As women suffering injuries from Mirena, more are turning to our court system for help.
The number of lawsuits against Bayer over its IUD product Mirena is significantly large. More than fifty (50) joined lawsuits are currently before a federal judge in New York State. The lawsuits allege that Bayer failed to appropriately warn of the risks associated with Mirena on its label, thereby causing countless women to use the product ignorant of its risks and dangers. Specifically, the joint cases assert that the Mirena product label did not warn of a very real danger of the product migrating and perforating a woman’s uterus. This can cause infertility and even death.
Four lawyers, all men, petitioned the federal judge to be appointed to the executive leadership counsel overseeing the joint litigation. However, the federal judge, a woman, advised the petitioning lawyers that they needed to include women on this litigation panel.
Many plaintiffs’ lawyers from all over the United States have expressed a desire that the executive committee on the Mirena litigation should include women. One such plaintiff’s lawyer said, “…female plaintiffs in the litigation would benefit from having at least some qualified female attorneys who could relate to their challenges and promote that empathy to a judge or jury. She said Bayer is likely to use the gender of its lawyers strategically, and the plaintiffs should do the same.” Bayer’s lead attorney is a woman.
Over thirty-five (35) plaintiff firms are involved in the litigation. These firms are in the process of creating a larger steering committee, aside from the executive committee, to take the point position on the joint litigation efforts. This larger committee would help with the large litigation cost, with each of the 35 firms contributing between $200,000.00 and $300,000.00.
However, the more than fifty Mirena cases that have consolidated in Federal court are only the tip of the iceberg in Mirena litigation. There are over a hundred more in New Jersey, New York, Missouri, Mississippi, and California state courts.
All of these cases, like the joined federal cases, allege that Bayer failed to warn patients and doctors that Mirena could perforate a woman’s uterus. Bayer claims that they did adequately warn patients and doctors about this risk. Also, Bayer says physicians prescribed Mirena knowing of these risks because they are training on the preformation risk of all IUD devices during their medical education. Bayer asserts that it is very assured of its labeling practices. They intend to move forward in litigation because they believe they are innocent of wrongdoing and negligence.
However, the number of injured women and their legal claims is increasing. Currently, there are no pending cases in Florida. Yet, there are more than 10 million women living in Florida. At very least, thousands of those women have been implanted with Mirena. It is a question of when not if, those women start coming forward because they have been injured by Mirena.
If you are a woman who is currently using the Mirena IUD, it is advisable to have it removed if you are experiencing any pain, abnormal bleeding, or any of these other serious side-effects. The described symptoms after removal don’t happen to every woman and are not dangerous, as long as suicidal thoughts do not become acute. On the other hand, a migrating IUD (one that moves from its intended location) can lead to internal injuries, multiple surgeries, miscarriage, and possible sterility. (833) 606-DRUG .