A new complainant has come forward to file a lawsuit against the Bayer Co. and its affiliates over alleged Mirena complications.

Mirena is an intrauterine device used to prevent pregnancy. It comes loaded with 52 mg of a synthetic progesterone known as levonorgestrel which is released into the uterus to prevent conception.

Birth control is achieved through a variety of unknown but effective suggested mechanisms such as by thickening the mucus of the cervix, thinning the lining of the uterus, and inhibiting the travel trajectory of live sperm.

The Mirena IUD is believed to be used domestically by nearly two million women and globally by close to 15 million.

Plaintiff Sonya R., currently a 37 year old citizen and resident of Franklinton, La., allegedly experienced immediate Mirena complications after the IUD was implanted without incident in her doctor’s office on May 27, 2015.

She says the Mirena complications included painful headaches, vertigo, dizziness, and disturbances in visual acuity.

After enduring Mirena complications for six months, Sonya R. says she sought medical advice in November 2015. She was seen at an eye care clinic and was diagnosed with a condition known as papilledema.

Papilledema originates via increased pressure in the brain. This pressure triggered the optic nerve to swell affecting the plaintiff’s eyesight.

A month later, Sonya claims, she was subjected to a lumbar puncture in an effort to determine the origin of the papilledema. Through this testing process, she was further diagnosed with pseudotumor cerebri (PTC) which is also known as idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH).

This determination was made at New Orleans Eye Specialists of Metairie, La.

In late August 2017, Sonya says she had her IUD removed because of PTC Mirena complications. She had been completely unaware of any relationship between the levonorgestrel-releasing birth control device and her PTC prior to May 2017, according to the lawsuit narrative.

The plaintiff says her regular doctor originally inserted the Mirena IUD and purportedly relied upon the manufacturer’s information and presentation as accurate.

He released the patient information booklet to Sonya and she says there was no mention of any potential for PTC Mirena complications.

The complainant is filing the following causes of action against the Bayer Co.:

Count 1: Negligence; Count 2: Design Defect; Count 3: Failure to Warn; Count 4: Strict Liability; Count 5: Breach of Implied Warranty; Count 6: Breach of Express Warranty; Count 7: Negligent Misrepresentation; Count 8: Fraudulent Misrepresentation; and Count 9: Fraud by Suppression and Concealment.

Sonya is seeking compensatory damages for her injury which she deems likely to be permanent.

Through her counsel, she is demanding a trial by jury with a favorable determination on her behalf that includes the maximum monetary relief allowed along with consideration for the costs of litigation. Sonya is also requesting punitive damages be levied against the defendants.

The Mirena Complications Lawsuit is Case No. 1:18-cv-03847-PAE-JLC in U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York.