Cleveland, OHSara knows all about Mirena birth control side effects. The mother of three opted for the Bayer IUD (intra-uterine device) three years ago but soon began to experience severe pain. After reporting to the emergency room of her local hospital, the pretty blonde was told her Mirena IUD had migrated away from the initial insertion point.
“They did an X-ray and saw that the IUD had completely perforated through my uterine wall and was just floating around in my abdomen,” she said in an interview with WEWS News Channel 5 (6/17/13) in Cleveland. Emergency surgery was required to remove the device, which is designed to remain at the original insertion point for a period of up to five years before the Mirena IUD becomes discharged.
That didn’t happen with Sara. She suffered Mirena uterine perforation. “It was horrible,” she told an interviewer with News Channel 5. “I would never recommend it to anyone.”
The Mirena contraceptive device is billed as a safe and effective form of birth control intended to do all the work for the woman from the inside. There are no pills to remember to take or contraceptive patches in need of tracking. Set it, and forget it. Or at least, that’s the intent.
For some 70,000 women, according to adverse reaction reports from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), that hasn’t been the case at all. Since 2000, according to records obtained by the investigative team at News Channel 5, there have been no fewer than 70,072 complaints involving Mirena IUD. While many of those complaints are minor, 4,775 women have reported “device dislocation” since 2008. According to a spokesperson for the FDA quoted in the report, dislocation could mean the Mirena IUD becoming imbedded into the uterus, moving from its initial placement position at the top of the uterine cavity or an IUD that has migrated outside the uterus.
In other words, Mirena uterine perforation.
According to the News Channel 5 report, one woman suffered a lacerated liver. Another required an appendectomy, hysterectomy and lost stomach tissue when her Mirena became imbedded in her uterus. Another Mirena lawsuit plaintiff suffered Mirena migration all the way to her rib cage.
Many doctors, including one interviewed in the WEWS news report, are bullish about the safety and effectiveness of Mirena birth control and prescribe it with little hesitation. Women, for whom Mirena works well, are understandably happy with the Bayer product.
And yet there is another issue, as revealed by a medical doctor writing in the “Letters” pages of the News-Journal of Daytona Beach (7/17/13). Steven White, MD had penned a response to a story that ran earlier this summer in the News-Journal with regard to the safety and effectiveness of the IUD birth control device. Dr. White makes the point that an IUD such as Mirena is an effective form of contraception only when it releases, in Mirena’s case, hormones into the uterus to prevent fertilization of the egg.
“Since the method is not 100 percent effective and does not prevent a woman from ovulating (releasing an egg) - fertilization, or the conception of a new human being, does occur,” Dr. White writes.
“When fertilization does take place, the IUD has failed as a contraceptive and may in fact cause a chemical abortion by another well-recognized mechanism of action. The IUD manufacturers clearly state that another effect of all these products is to “thin the lining of the uterus,” potentially altering the normal process of embryo implantation. Preventing implantation of the newly conceived human being results in a chemical abortion.
“This is a very important distinction for those women seeking an effective method of contraception but who object to abortion, regardless of how unlikely or infrequent the possibility.”
Dr. White concludes, “In the interest of full disclosure and true informed consent, both the contraceptive and potential abortifacient effects of IUDs should be discussed with every patient before prescribing this method of birth control.”
According to a PRWeb Newswire (8/6/13) release, there are at the moment at least 100 Mirena side effects lawsuits pending in the Southern District of New York, with an additional 173 lawsuits filed in Bergen County Superior Court, New Jersey. The next status conference for Mirena multi-district litigation (In re: Mirena IUD Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2434) is set for August 14 of this year.
If you or a loved one have suffered losses in this case, please click the link below and your complaint will be sent to a drugs & medical lawyer who may evaluate your Mirena IUD claim at no cost or obligation.