By TopClassActions  |  November 14, 2013

Category: Pharmaceuticals
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook for the latest Mirena Class Action Lawsuit News!
 
 

Lawsuit Says Mirena IUD Migration Caused Unplanned Pregnancy

By Amanda Antell

 


Mirena IUD LawsuitUtah plaintiff Amanda M. Ritzert is suing Bayer Pharmaceuticals for the injuries she allegedly sustained from the Mirena IUD product. Ritzert alleges that the device perforated and migrated through her uterus soon after the device was inserted, causing her to become pregnant.

The IUD was implanted into the plaintiff on Dec. 13, 2005. The procedure was conducted by her physician, with no complications reported during the implantation. The Mirena lawsuit states that at the time of the implantation, there were no warnings or indications on the device to warn her of possible device migration, nor was her physician aware of such possibilities, giving the plaintiff no reason to suspect that she would have to endure anything of the sort.

Despite follow-up checkups which indicated the Mirena IUD was still in place, it was discovered in May 2006 that Ritzert was pregnant. According to the medical examinations which led to this discovery, the device had perforated and migrated outside the uterus, causing the unplanned pregnancy and the need to immediately remove the IUD. To this day, the plaintiff continues to suffer from the results of the defective design of the Mirena IUD.

Ritzert is suing Bayer for allegedly being directly responsible for manufacturing, selling, marketing, and distributing a dangerous product. The charges include negligence, false advertising, misrepresenting a product, and concealing information.

Overview of Mirena IUD Complications

The Mirena IUD is an intrauterine system designed to be a long-term birth control option in women. It is used by more than 15 million women worldwide. Mirena is manufactured by Bayer Pharmaceuticals and was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in December 2000. Many experts believe the product’s popularity comes from the fact that it only needs to be changed once every five years, and that women do not have to follow a regimented schedule as they would have to with birth control pills.

The device itself is t-shaped, and is directly inserted into the uterus. Once inside, the IUD then release a hormone called levonorgestrel from its endpoints into the uterus, which then prevents pregnancy.

 

Ideally, a woman could use the Mirena IUD for up to five years without any worry of unwanted pregnancy and without worrying about missing a day on a schedule she would have to keep, like she would with oral contraceptives. Unfortunately, for Ritzert, this was not the case, as the IUD allegedly perforated and migrated her uterus, which then made her vulnerable to the possibility of an unwanted pregnancy.

Ritzert’s case is hardly uncommon. More and more women have been filing injury reports to the FDA, indicating that their Mirena IUD migrated from their uterus, causing them to suffer pain, bloating or unwanted pregnancies. In the most extreme cases, ectopic pregnancies were reported from these women. In the cases of the ectopic pregnancies, many medical experts attributed the cause to Mirena’s hormone, levonorgestrel, due to the fact that is currently unknown as to what the exact side effects are on the human body.

Furthermore, the Mirena IUD advertisements actually recommend that this device go to women who have already had one child, as there could be complications from using Mirena. The advertisements never specify what these complications are, just that it is recommended for women who have no interest in getting pregnant in the near future.

This has led to mass criticism from the FDA and the public, stating that the Mirena IUD advertisements do not adequately describe the risks of Mirena IUD complications and overstate the benefits. Many lawsuits and multidistrict litigation (MDL) suits have been filed against Bayer as result. Ritzert’s case is still currently pending.

This case is Amanda M. Ritzert vs. Bayer Pharmaceuticals, CASE 0:13-cv-02305-SRN-SER, in the United States District Court of Minnesota.

File a Mirena 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 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 IUD injury attorneys working this investigation do not get paid until you do.

 

We tell you about cash you can claim EVERY WEEK! Sign up for our free newsletter.

 

 

{loadposition content_postads}

 

All medical device, dangerous drug and medical class action and lawsuit news updates are listed in the Drug and Medical Device section of Top Class Actions.

 

LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
©2008 – 2013 Top Class Actions® LLC
Various Trademarks held by their respective owners.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. By submitting your comment and contact information, you agree to receive marketing emails from Top Class Actions regarding this and/or similar lawsuits or settlements, and/or to be contacted by an attorney or law firm to discuss the details of your potential case at no charge to you if you qualify. Required fields are marked *

Please note: Top Class Actions is not a settlement administrator or law firm. Top Class Actions is a legal news source that reports on class action lawsuits, class action settlements, drug injury lawsuits and product liability lawsuits. Top Class Actions does not process claims and we cannot advise you on the status of any class action settlement claim. You must contact the settlement administrator or your attorney for any updates regarding your claim status, claim form or questions about when payments are expected to be mailed out.