Couple Sues Bayer over Alleged Mirena IUD Complications

Couple Sues Bayer over Alleged Mirena IUD Complications

By Robert J. Boumis

Christina and Joshua Sells of North Carolina have filed a lawsuit against healthcare giant Bayer Pharmaceuticals, alleging that the company’s Mirena IUD caused serious health complications for Christina Sells. 

According to the Mirena IUD lawsuit, Christina Sells’s health care providers implanted her with the Mirena IUD in October 2011. At the time of the initial surgery, there were reportedly no signs of problems, nor were there any issues in the recommended follow-up appointment. Per the Mirena IUD lawsuit, the information included with the contraceptive device only mentions the possibility of spontaneous migration, a situation in which the contraceptive device punctures the uterus and leaves the intended position, as a complication that can occur during the initial insertion of the Mirena IUD. 

However, in January 2013, Christina Sells was informed that the Mirena IUD could no longer be detected on ultrasound. Subsequently, she underwent laparoscopic surgery to remove the contraceptive device. According to the Mirena IUD lawsuit, this surgery required substantial medical costs and caused her permanent medical issues and pain. 

The Mirena IUD lawsuit goes on to detail the history and function of the contraceptive device. The complaint asserts that due to Bayer’s own clinical trials, peer-reviewed studies, and legally-mandated postmarket surveillance, Bayer reasonably should have known about the potential risks associated with the Mirena IUD. Per the text of the complaint, this knowledge should have included the risk of spontaneous migration – the complication that Christina Sells says she experienced. Additionally, the complaint lists difficulty conceiving and carrying a child to term after the device is removed as a potential Mirena IUD complication. 

The Mirena IUD lawsuit further asserts that the manufacturers not only failed to protect the public from a potentially dangerous device, but aggressively promoted the device while downplaying the risks in their advertising. The complaint cites a 2009 warning letter issued by the Department of Health and Human Services Division of Drug Advertising and Communications, which ordered Bayer to alter the advertising of the Mirena IUD, alleging that the advertisements for the contraceptive device played up benefits while downplaying risks, over-promoting the Mirena IUD and portraying it as safer than it actually was. 

The Mirena IUD lawsuit is formally titled Christina Sells, et al. v. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Inc., Case No. 2:13-cv-04832-SDW-MCA, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. 

If you or someone you care about used the Mirena IUD and went on to suffer from serious side effects, you’ve almost certainly found yourself in a challenging situation. It often requires surgical intervention to correct the complications associated with an errant Mirena IUD. In addition to the pain, suffering and stress associated with surgery, this situation also puts people up against serious financial strain, including lost wages during recovery and mounting medical bills. But regardless of the situation you have found yourself facing, you must remember that you still have rights, and there are steps that you can take to regain a measure of control over your situation. You can start by visiting the Mirena IUD Injury Class Action Lawsuit Settlement Investigation Lawsuit Settlement Investigation. Here, you can enter information about your situation for a review by a legal expert with a background in this type of litigation. The initial consultation is completely free of charge, and from here you can receive additional guidance on the best steps to take in your exact situation.