Mirena IUD Lawsuits Continue to Grow

As of Dec. 21, 2014, the number of Mirena IUD lawsuits has grown to 1,375. These Mirena lawsuits have been consolidated into a Mirena multidistrict litigation, or MDL, by women who have alleged Mirena IUD migration, uterine perforation as well as other Mirena IUD complications.

Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals created the Mirena IUD in 2000, intending it to be a simpler form of birth control. The Mirena IUD device would be inserted into the uterus where it is supposed to protect against pregnancy.

The Mirena IUD is a t-shaped plastic device that needs to be replaced every five years and releases small doses of leveonorgestrel into the blood stream which controls the hormone levels needed to prevent pregnancy.

The Mirena IUD has been an appealing option for millions of women, since it does not require a woman to remember to take a birth control pill each day. It is primarily recommended for women who have already had one child.

Unfortunately, severe Mirena IUD complications have been found in a large number of users. In fact, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a warning to Bayer stating that some of their claims about the safety of Mirena was misleading. Bayer has also been accused of failing to warn against Mirena side effects in Mirena IUD lawsuits.

Mirena IUD Complications

One of the most common Mirena IUD side effects is migration caused by the body rejecting the device. Women have claimed that the device actually left the uterus, causing uterine perforation in addition to other health concerns. This is the primary claim in women involved in the Mirena IUD MDL.

The Mirena IUD label does warn against migration, but the language states that this is an “uncommon” complication.

Other Mirena IUD  complications include pelvic pain, infection, pelvic inflammatory disease, perforation of the uterus or cervix, infection, abscess, infertility, vaginal erosion, ectopic pregnancy, and intrauterine pregnancy.

Mirena IUD Lawsuits

Mirena IUD lawsuits against Bayer claim the manufacturer failed to warn against these Mirena side effects and overstated the safety and efficacy of the device. Plaintiffs have alleged that they never would have used the device had they been aware of the risks involved. 

Many women have had to undergo laparoscopic surgery in order to remove the Mirena IUD because of migration.

Claims in Mirena IUD lawsuits have included negligence, false advertising, concealing information, and misrepresenting a product. Plaintiffs may also file for loss of consortium, which loss of intimacy with a spouse.

Plaintiffs seek to win compensation for the alleged Mirena IUD complications experienced by the individual.

There are two Mirena MDLs underway at this time. One is In re: Mirena Litigation, in the Bergen Country Superior Court in New Jersey. The other is In re: Mirena IUD Products Liability Litigation, MDL. No. 2434, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.