IUDs Becoming More Popular than Birth Control Pills

Intrauterine devices (IUDs) have been used by more women compared to birth control pills, according to a statistics. One of the popular brands of the IUD is Mirena, a small, T-shaped and flexible device which is inserted into the uterus. It is believed to be 99.9 percent effective in preventing pregnancies but it seems to be a controversial contraceptive which results to some lawsuits.

Studies reveal that IUD is 20 times more effective than other birth control methods like pills, patches and vaginal rings. Birth control pills, the method of choice for 28 percent of U.S. women, are the most commonly used form of reversible contraception, but their effectiveness depends on consistent daily use. Surveys have reported failure rates with the Pill similar to those seen in the current study. Patches and rings require less attentiveness than pills, but they still leave room for human error. The birth control patch needs to be changed weekly, while the vaginal ring needs to be changed once a month.

Women choose to use IUDs because of its long-term effectiveness in preventing pregnancy, plus it is fuss-free to use, unlike pills which you have to remember to take it everyday. A woman may use IUD as contraceptive for up to five years, but if you decide to get pregnant again, the IUD may be removed by the help of your doctor. The main advantage of IUD is that it works immediately; it requires no maintenance and is a one-time cost, allow you to have sex immediately.

However, these birth control methods are associated with various health complications. For instance, IUD is believed to cause infection and fertility problems. In one out of 1,000 women, the IUD may potentially get stuck in or puncture (perforate) the uterus. Although perforation cases are rare, it almost always occurs during insertion. The IUD may need to be removed if the uterus has been perforated because it may damage the uterus and its nearby organs.

If you are a woman who is interested in Mirena or is having problems with Mirena, you may refer to Mirena IUD Side Effects, which has more substantial information regarding this matter.

References:

• abcnews.go.com/Health/iuds-effective-pill-study/story?id=16415959#.UWhYQqKmiAg
• articles.latimes.com/2012/feb/28/health/la-he-contraception-insurance-20120228
• foxnews.com/health/2012/08/02/more-us-women-choosing-iuds-for-birth-control/
• answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100612122552AAhj6Fh

Panel to Decide on Mirena IUD Lawsuit Consolidation, Rottenstein Law Group Reports

On March 21 a judicial panel was expected to meet to decide on the consolidation of pretrial proceedings of Mirena lawsuits in federal courts nationwide.* The Rottenstein Law Group, a Mirena IUD law firm, maintains a website that features Mirena news, in addition to Mirena IUD lawsuit information.

 

The United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation in San Diego, Calif., is considering the consolidation (also known as a “multidistrict litigation”) as a way to streamline pretrial processes from multiple federal courts around the country into a single federal court under one presiding judge, according to court records (In re: Mirena IUD Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2434 (JPML)). The Mirena IUD, manufactured by Bayer, is an intrauterine device that slowly releases a hormone over five years to prevent pregnancy. It has been alleged to cause serious adverse side effects, such as device migration, device embedment and pain and discomfort.

 

“The MDL would allow the plaintiffs in the existing federal cases—and additional future claimants—to more quickly get their day in court,” said Rochelle Rottenstein, principal of the Rottenstein Law Group, which currently represents clients in Mirena lawsuits nationwide. “Mirena recipients trusted that Bayer’s IUD was a safe contraceptive alternative. If the evidence of eventual trials suggests Bayer violated that trust, then the company should be held accountable.”

 

Read full story at PRWeb.com: Panel to Decide on Mirena IUD Lawsuit Consolidation, Rottenstein Law Group Reports

Mirena IUD Lawsuit Update: The Rottenstein Law Group Responds to Report of Lawsuits’ Effect on Bayer’s Recent Stock Performance

NEW YORK, Feb. 12, 2013 /PRNewswire/ — The Rottenstein Law Group acknowledges a Bloomberg report about German drug manufacturer Bayer’s recent stock losses, which the story attributes to a Mirena lawsuit.

The company saw a 2.8 percent loss following an American woman’s lawsuit (Prendergast v. Bayer Pharmaceuticals Corp., 13-00450, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania) against Bayer, according to Bloomberg.* She alleges that the company failed to warn of the risks associated with the Mirena hormonal intrauterine device, such as the risk of ectopic pregnancy and the possibility of device embedment and migration.** As of Feb. 11th, the company stock price slump has persisted.

Rochelle Rottenstein , principal of the Rottenstein Law Group, said she has heard from many women who have discussed similar alleged side effects and risks associated with the Mirena IUD. The Rottenstein Law Group represents clients in Mirena lawsuits.

Read full story at PRNewswire.com: Mirena IUD Lawsuit Update: The Rottenstein Law Group Responds to Report of Lawsuits’ Effect on Bayer’s Recent Stock Performance

Rottenstein Law Group Reveals Results of Its Mirena IUD Lawsuit Interviews on New Website

The Rottenstein Law Group, which represents clients with claims stemming from injuries allegedly suffered as a result of using prescription drugs and medical devices, has created a website dedicated to issues that apply to women who have used the Mirena IUD and are considering filing a Mirena IUD lawsuit.

New York, NY (PRWEB) November 30, 2012

On the Rottenstein Law Group’s Mirena IUD Lawsuit Hotline at 1 (877) 681-0493, the firm’s attorneys have spoken to many women who think they might be entitled to compensation for health problems allegedly caused by the intrauterine birth control device known as the Mirena IUD. The firm has also looked into the injuries the Mirena IUD might cause, and has investigated the likelihood of recovering for Mirena IUD-imposed injuries via a lawsuit.

The firm has posted all of this information, in a format that is easy to understand, on a website at http://www.mirenalawsuit.us. Past and present users of the Mirena IUD who have questions about Mirena IUD side effects or Mirena IUD lawsuits should visit website, or call the Rottenstein Law Group’s Mirena IUD hotline at (877) 681-0493 so the firm’s attorneys can review their cases. The consultation will be free and confidential.

Read full story on PRWeb.com – Rottenstein Law Group Reveals Results of Its Mirena IUD Lawsuit Interviews on New Website

Liability Lawsuits Expected To Rise

Sixteen lawsuits have been filed in New Jersey as of August this year, television networks and newspapers report.  cases were also cited in other states and from all indications, there are more to come. In other states, cases have already been reported and more are foreseen to be filed. Bayer has appealed for a centralized management of the Mirena litigation as a offshoot of increasing number of cases. This is also in expectation

An aggressive marketing campaign was launched after approval by the FDA in 2000 and in a short span of time gained much acceptance from its target market composed mainly of young women.   Also known as IUS (intrauterine system), Mirena IUD is a contraceptive which is inserted in a woman’s uterus where it disrupts the interaction of the egg and the sperm, thereby preventing pregnancy.

Mirena IUD has been alleged to be the cause of major complications and serious problems as side effects of the product. Among those mentioned are uterus perforation which can cause internal scarring resulting to infection and damage to other organs, migration which results to intestinal perforation and obstruction, and severe infections which may cause infertility or hamper the chance of conceiving. Partial of complete expulsion has also been identified as a possible result especially to women who have not experienced childbirth or those who had the device inserted after delivery or abortion.

The first report involving Mirena IUD came in October 2011 when a patient from Virginia sued her OB/GYN  doctor for medical malpractice. It was alleged by Angela Collins that a Mirena IUD was left floating in her system after Dr. Karen Wade implanted the birth control device in September 2006.  Collins is suing Dr. Wade and her clinic for $2 million before the Winchester Circuit Court in Virginia for alleged negligence in the failure of using proper medical procedures to discover and remove said device from her body.

Barely a year after this lawsuit, more women came out claiming that the implanted Mirena IUDs migrated within their bodies and removal procedures had to be undertaken. These two complaints filed in New Jersey were followed by similar lawsuits from women in Oklahoma and Ohio.  Same as the cases in New Jersey, these complaints also allege that the devices were detached from their uterus and were now threatening their bodies.

REFERENCES:

• mirena-us.com/having-mirena-placed/index.jsp
• contraception.about.com/od/iud/a/mirena.htm