Contact us today for a FREE no-obligation initial consultation

law done differently!



Mirena Patients Allege Permanent Blurred Vision, Blindness

By | Mirena

A Mirena lawsuit filed by a woman alleging the intrauterine contraceptive device caused her to suffer pseudotumor cerebri – characterized by severe headaches, blurred vision and permanent 40 percent vision lost in her right eye – is moving forward.

Plaintiff previously overcame defendant drug manufacturer Bayer’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Now, a recently-updated docket in Stanley v. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Inc. reveals the parties are engaged in various Daubert motion hearings, arguing for submission of their respective expert witnesses’ testimony into evidence.

Daubert Standard hearings are standard in these product liability lawsuits because they rely so heavily on scientific evidence to prove causation and damages. It’s a standard that was adopted into the Federal Rules of Evidence (and soon after by many states) following the 1993 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Daubert v. Merrel Dow Pharmaceuticals. In that case, the court agreed on several guidelines for the admission of expert witness scientific testimony. These include the judge as gatekeeper, relevance and reliability, analysis of scientific methodology and review of illustrative factors.  Read More

mirena lawsuit

Mirena Injury Lawsuits of 2018 Focus Mostly on Pseudotumor Cerebri

By | Mirena

Mirena® & Pseudotumor Cerebri

There seems to be a fair amount of misunderstanding surrounding the Mirena injury lawsuits of the last several years and which cases are currently moving forward. Some women injured by the Mirena IUD in some form or another see attorneys regularly circulating advertisements for people who have suffered a Mirena injury to call – yet they can’t find a lawyer to take the case.

Mirena IUD injury

As our Utah product liability attorneys can explain, the issue has to do with the root cause of the injury and that fact that certain claims have thusfar stalled in federal court, while others are just now being presented.

Initially, injury lawsuits filed against Mirena manufacturer Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals alleged the company failed to adequately warn doctors and patients of the risk of intrauterine migration of the IUD as well as the potential risk of perforation. Plaintiffs accused the drug maker of failing to do all it could to make the IUD safe and to make its warning of the risk of serious and permanent injury clear. Unfortunately, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, overseeing the multi-district litigation (MDL) In re: Mirena IUD Product Liability Litigation, tossed about 1,200 of those cases after blocking all plaintiffs’ expert witnesses, finding them, “unqualified or unreliable,” while conversely allowing all seven of Bayer’s expert witnesses. The judge stated she’d reached the conclusion “reluctantly.” Read More

Mirena IUD Horror Stories Ignite Concern Over Side Effects

By | Mirena

Mirena IUD

An increasing number of physicians are promoting the Mirena IUD, t-shaped medical devices that contain hormones and are inserted into the uterus and prevents pregnancy by thickening cervical mucus, thinning the uterine lining and inhibiting sperm from reaching and fertilizing the egg. However, what patients often aren’t being told are the severe side effects that so many others are reporting and attributing to Mirena. In fact, a number of Mirena lawsuits allege the manufacturer has been negligent in its failure to warn of serious side effects, including most notably a condition called pseudotumor cerebri. Mirena IUD lawyer

Pseudotumor cerebri is a type of hypertension in your head that dangerously elevates the pressure of cerebrospinal fluid. Researchers studying the issue say women who take Mirena or other forms of birth control that contain the hormone levonorgestrel may be at much higher risk for developing this and other complications.

Recently, the Australian media has been spotlighting some of the dangerous side effects of Mirena, particularly those about which patients had no idea prior to implantation. Further, the causal connection between these side effects and the hormonal birth control sometimes isn’t diagnosed for months or even years.  Read More

Mirena IUD Injury Lawyers Explain Symptoms of Intracranial Hypertension

By | Mirena

Mirena & Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension

When it comes to birth control protection, an increasing number of obstetricians and gynecologists are recommending patients opt for an intrauterine device (also known as an IUD). A recent study published in the journal Contraception reveals IUD and implant use is now the No. 3 most commonly-used form of reversible contraception for women between the ages of 25 and 44 – after “the pill” and the condom. Planned Parenthood reports a 91 percent increase in the number of implants and IUDs used by patents in just the last five years. Mirena IUD injury lawyer

Mirena IUD injury lawyers recognize the popularity is because IUDs have generally been deemed convenient and effective – long-acting (some models up to 10 years), don’t require daily action and can be removed at any time. Unlike copper IUDs, Mirena is hormone-based, designed to release a set amount of the hormone for up to five years.

Unfortunately, the Mirena IUD has not been without the potential for serious risk, including the development of a condition called intracranial hypertension. The formal medical term is “pseudotumor cerebri.” This condition has been linked before to women who had taken: Depo-Provera, Norplant and certain types of emergency contraception. Now, there is evidence Mirena too may be a catalyst for intracranial hypertension. This is not a minor side effect, but often extremely painful and sometimes resulting in permanent blindness. Thousands of lawsuits have followed, alleging patients were not adequately warned of this potential danger.

While Bayer, the manufacturer of Mirena, warns about more common side effects, such as embedment, perforation and expulsion, the official warning makes no mention of intracranial hypertension. Our Salt Lake City Mirena IUD injury lawyers know from a Utah product liability standpoint, these are the grounds on which lawsuits may prevail.  Read More

Pseudotumor Cerebri

Mirena & Intracranial Hypertension

By | Mirena

Intracranial Hypertension

Intracranial hypertension is a medical condition related to high pressure in the spaces that surround the spinal cord and brain. The space is filled with cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). CSF is a clear colorless liquid that is designed to cushion the brain and spinal cord, provide nourishment, and carry away waste from the central nervous system.

What Are The Symptoms?

The most common symptoms of intracranial hypertension are:

  • Headaches
  •  Vision loss
  •  Blind Spots
  •  Poor peripheral vision
  •  Temporary episodes of blindness
  •  Ringing of the ears.

How Is Intracranial Hypertension Diagnosed?

Intracranial hypertension is often characterized as a diagnosis by exclusion. This means a comprehensive medical evaluation takes place and possible cause are excluded. Often times after exclusion of many possible causes a lumbar puncture, also known as a spinal tap, is performed to measure the cerebrospinal fluid pressure and to collect fluid for analysis. Depending on the outcome of this procedure further diagnostic tests such as brain imaging and optic evaluation are performed.

The Mirena Connection

Substantial medical studies support a link between the Mirena® IUD and increased intracranial hypertension. The link was established as early as early as 1995 when medical researchers wrote about the association between pseudotumor cerebri (increased intracranial pressure) and the levonogrestrel contraceptive Norplant®. Based on the analysis of the Food & Drug Administration’s adverse event reports, the authors found 39 cases of increased intracranial hypertension. Based on this the authors speculated, but did not confirm, that Norplant may have caused 39 cases of intracranial hypertension in women who used the Norplant device. Interestingly, the label and the package insert for Norplant warned about the risk of pseudotumor cerebri with Norplant use. Mirena contains levonogrestrel just as Norplant.

Because of the previous association of pseudotrumor cerebri with levonorgestrel and the accompanying warning of increased intracranial hypertension by the manufacture of the Norplant system, it would seem reasonable that the manufacturer of the Mirena® IUD, Bayer, would have warned physicians and users of the device of the substantial risk of pseudotumor cerebri. Thus, a Mirena® IUD case is a classic failure to warn case.

How We Can Help

If you or your loved were diagnosed with Intracranial Hypertension or Pseudotumor Cerebri while using the Mirena IUD you have many questions. We are here to answer your questions. The James Esparza Law Firm has helped many individuals and families rebuild their lives after life altering injuries. We can help you too. Call 1-800-745-4050.