Women throughout the country continue to file Mirena IUD lawsuits alleging the contraceptive device caused them to suffer serious complications, including uterine perforations. Most recently, a woman in Ohio filed suit alleging her Mirena IUD perforated her uterine wall. The claim, which was filed on November 2 in U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, is believed to be the first Mirena IUD lawsuit filed in the state.

According to the Ohio lawsuit, the plaintiff’s Mirena IUD was found embedded in the omentum, near her liver. Her lawsuit alleges Bayer failed to provide warnings regarding serious Mirena side effects, including spontaneous device migration and uterine perforation. The complaint seeks monetary damages, including punitive damages, on behalf of the plaintiff.

A number of young women have filed similar Mirena lawsuits in recent months. Currently, at least 16 such complaints are pending in New Jersey Superior Court. Perhaps in anticipation of a large litigation, Bayer recently petitioned the New Jersey Supreme Court for the consolidation of all Mirena IUD lawsuits filed in the state in a single proceeding in Middlesex County.

Like the Ohio complaint, many of these Mirena IUD lawsuits allege that device migration outside of the uterus is an all-too-common Mirena complication. Mirena IUD migration can cause uterine perforations, and the device may even travel outside of the uterus into the abdomen. This can lead to a number of dangerous Mirena side effects, including infections and scarring, intestinal obstructions, and organ damage. If the Mirena IUD migrates, it may no longer prevent pregnancy. Women who become pregnant while Mirena is still in their body have a higher risk of ectopic pregnancy.

The Mirena IUD was approved as a contraceptive method in 2000, and in 2009 was approved as a treatment for heavy periods in women who wish to use an IUD for birth control. According to the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA), potential Mirena side effects include:

  • ectopic pregnancy
  • intrauterine pregnancy
  • group A streptococcal sepsis
  • pelvic inflammatory disease
  • embedment of the device in the uterine wall
  • perforation of the uterine wall or cervix

In 2009, the FDA sent Bayer a letter warning that its Mirena marketing “overstates the efficacy of Mirena, presents unsubstantiated claims, minimizes the risks of using Mirena, and includes false or misleading presentations regarding Mirena.” Among other things, the FDA took issue with Bayer’s claims that using Mirena would help a woman “look and feel great.”

Young women who used the Mirena IUD and suffered device migration, uterine perforations or other severe Mirena side effects may be entitled to compensation for medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and more. If you would like to learn more about filing a Mirena IUD lawsuit, please contact the attorneys at Bernstein Liebhard LLP today by calling 1-877-779-1414.

Published November 9, 2012 by