Lawsuit Alleges Mirena IUD Migrated Outside of Uterus

Lawsuit Alleges Mirena IUD Migrated Outside of Uterus

By Courtney Coren

A Georgia woman has filed a Mirena IUD lawsuit against Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals because the IUD migrated outside of her uterus, requiring her to have it surgically removed. 

Jennifer Danley is a 34-year-old woman who lives in Lawrenceville, Georgia. She had the Mirena IUD inserted into her uterus by her doctor, and the doctor confirmed that the device had not perforated her uterus when it was inserted. However, at a routine checkup it was found that the device not only perforated her uterus, but it had also migrated outside of her uterus and became embedded in another part of her body. She then had to have surgery to have the Mirena IUD removed from her body. As a result, Danley incurred expensive medical costs, sustained serious physical injuries, suffered severe pain, lost earnings because of time she missed from work, and will have to undergo further medical treatments.

The Mirena IUD is a contraceptive device made of a flexible plastic that is placed in the woman’s uterus by her doctor. It releases a synthetic progestogen called levonorgestrel that is released into the uterus and works as birth control. The Mirena IUD is effective for five years and it is designed to remain in the uterus for that amount of time. It is often advertised to busy mothers who don’t have the time to remember to take a traditional birth control pill. 

The Mirena IUD packaging does warn that the device may migrate outside of the uterus if the uterus is perforated during insertion, which is why doctors typically check via ultrasound after the device is inserted to be sure that perforation has not occurred. However, Bayer does not warn that the IUD may migrate spontaneously — that is, even if perforation doesn’t occur during the insertion process.

Danley’s charges against Bayer include negligence for creating a product with such severe side effects, creating a product with a defective design, creating a product with a manufacturing defect, failing to properly warn doctors and patients of the potential risks linked to the Mirena IUD, breach of warranty for claiming that the Mirena IUD was “safe and well accepted by users” and that it is fit for its intended use as a birth control device, falsely and fraudulently telling the medical community that the product was sufficiently tested and found to be safe, and for concealing the risk associated with the Mirena IUD. 

The Georgia woman is asking Bayer to compensate her for medical costs that she incurred, punitive damages to be paid for selling an unreasonably dangerous and defective product, attorneys’ fees and costs, and anything else that they court decides is appropriate. 

The Mirena IUD lawsuit is Jennifer Danley v. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Inc., Case No. 7:13-cv-06586-CS, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division.

Danley is asking that her Mirena IUD lawsuit be included in the Mirena IUD Products Liability Litigation multidistrict litigation (MDL No. 2434) that was established on April 8, 2013 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern district of New York under Judge Cathy Seibel. The Mirena MDL in that federal court is for Mirena IUD lawsuits that claim the intrauterine device perforated the uterus, became embedded in the uterus, or migrated outside of the uterus. Danley believes her case fits those requirements. 

If you or someone you know has been injured by a Mirena IUD, legal options are available. Learn more and get a free legal consultation regarding a claim’s eligibility at the Mirena IUD Injury Class Action Lawsuit Settlement Investigation. Experienced legal professionals have access to medical experts to assess whether or not a Mirena IUD may be playing a role in your current pain, discomfort or other serious side effects, so act now.