Mass. Woman Sues Bayer for Mirena IUD Injuries

Massachusetts plaintiff Candice Ditalia is suing Bayer Pharmaceuticals for the injuries she allegedly sustained from the Mirena IUD. Ditalia claims that as a direct result of the device, she suffered physical, emotional and economic injuries.

According to the Mirena IUD lawsuit, Ditalia first had the device inserted into her on June 2010. The procedure reportedly went normally, with the plaintiff suffering no initial complications. Soon after the insertion, Ditalia says she started feeling the symptoms of cramping, intense stomach pain and irregular bleeding.

Medical examination revealed that the Mirena IUD had perforated the plaintiff’s uterus, and embedded itself on the inner lining of her abdomen. On Aug. 1, 2010, Ditalia underwent surgery to have the device removed.

Ditalia asserts that if she had known about the possibility of device perforation and migration, she never would have opted for the Mirena IUD. Ditalia states that Bayer had the responsibility to warn her of any and all side effects that could possibly be incurred from the Mirena IUD because she was relying on the information given to her at the time.

Ditalia is suing Bayer for being directly responsible for manufacturing, selling, distributing and marketing a dangerous product. The charges in the Mirena IUD lawsuit include negligence, false advertising, concealing information and misrepresenting a product.

Overview of Mirena IUD Complications

The Mirena IUD, manufactured by Bayer, is currently the most popular intrauterine device in the United States. It is a small T-shaped device composed of biologically safe plastic, which releases the hormone levonorgestrel after it is implanted in the uterus. Like other intrauterine birth control devices, it is a long-term birth control device–the Mirena IUD is designed to last up to five years. After it was approved by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) in 2000, Bayer aggressively marketed the device as a difficulty-free birth control option that is ideal for busy mothers or similarly stressed women.

Interestingly, the Mirena IUD advertisements advise women to have at least one child before having the device inserted because the complete side effects posed by levonorgestrel are unknown. Additionally, Bayer was heavily criticized for Bayer’s advertisements of the Mirena IUD, for not adequately explaining side effects or the possibility of device perforation or migration.

To this day, many patients report device perforation, migration, organ embedment, non-cancerous ovarian cysts, ectopic pregnancy, cramping, pain and other complications from the Mirena IUD. Since its release, more than 70,000 Mirena IUD injury reports have been filed with the FDA. Of these reports, 5,000 involved device migration, and 1,322 reported a punctured uterus. Despite the severity of some of these complications, Bayer allegedly did not even mention the possibility of device migration on the Mirena IUD until relatively recently.

This Mirena IUD lawsuit is Candice Ditalia v. Bayer Pharmaceuticals, Case No. 7:13-cv-07313-CS, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts.

File a Mirena IUD Injury Lawsuit Today

If you believe that you or a loved one have been the victim of a Mirena IUD injury, you have legal options. Please visit the Mirena IUD Injury Class Action Lawsuit Settlement Investigation. There, you can submit your claim for a free legal review and if it qualifies for legal action, a seasoned Mirena IUD lawyer will contact you for a free, no-obligation consultation. You will be guided through the litigation process at no out-of-pocket expenses or hidden fees. The Mirena IUD injury attorneys working this investigation do not get paid until you do.