Get a site

A blog entry written by Kat Stoeffel entitled “IUD Evangelism: The Birth Control that Converts” tells how women are willing to gamble their risk using Mirena IUD. In an article published in a popular magazine’s website, she wrote how women praised Mirena, even with the reported health complications triggered by the device. With Mirena’s sleek marketing strategies, it made the IUD appealing to women, especially busy mothers. Mirena is not as fuzzy to use compare to birth control pills, which needs to be taken daily. However, the blog article has not included the potential harmful effects or the growing number of lawsuits filed by injured Mirena users.

Read More: Some Women Are Enthusiastic About Mirena, Despite Risks

The Rottenstein Law Group represents women in Mirena lawsuits and responds to a recent study on women’s perceptions of contraception with caution. The firm maintains an informational website on the lawsuits at


A recent study reported by Reuters this week on the birth control preferences of women has been a topic of controversy.* An overwhelming majority of the women surveyed prefered birth control pills over intrauterine devices (including the hormone-releasing Mirena IUD). However, doctors in the story assert that the IUD is safer and more reliable than the pill. The Rottenstein Law Group represents women in Mirena lawsuits and responds to the study with caution. In addition, the firm maintains an informational website on the lawsuits at


Based on an FDA adverse events report** and the many phone calls a week the Rottenstein Law Group receives from women who allege serious Mirena side effects, the safety of the Mirena IUD is in question. Mirena was approved by the FDA in 2000 and was the only hormone-releasing IUD until earlier this year, when the FDA approved Skyla, a similar IUD also manufactured by Bayer.


Read full story at Rottenstein Law Group Comments on Report of Women’s Contraception

Bayer is facing a lawsuit filed against them by a woman who met problems with her implanted Mirena intrauterine device.She assumed that her Mirena IUD shifted into her abdominal wall.

With her lawsuit filed before the New Jersey Superior Court last July 26, the 24-year-old woman, stated that she had to undergo an operation since the Mirena IUD inserted into her uterus, moved into her abdomen.This is a strong indication that Mirena, a brand she trusted to do her good, only did the opposite.

It was in March 2009 that the complainant had her Mirena IUD inserted to her but by the time when her health care providers went to remove it around September of 2010, they can no longer find the device in her uterus. Through a CT scan, it was discovered that the intrauterine device migrated into her left abdominal wall, so in October of 2010, a laparoscopic operative procedure was done to remove the device.

As a birth control device, Mirena IUD is inserted into the uterus and can be used for almost five years. It is thought to be of convenience to its users and encouraged women to try it for long-term birth control.Its placement is intended to stop pregnancy by not allowing sperm to reach the egg, it also has levonorgestrel, a progestin which works by stopping the ovaries from discharging eggs for reproduction.

Bayer made Mirena in 2000.Many are using this as a birth control through the years as efforts were made to promote this as a good birth control method.However, a number of users have reported experiencing severe and painful Mirena IUD problems, which include perforation or puncturing of the uterus or migration of the device to other parts of the body if a perforation is not detected. This brought about intestinal perforations, obstructions, swellings, adhesions as well as a risk of infection to some women using Mirena IUD.

Regarding the accusations raised in the Mirena lawsuit, as well as other similar claims filed against Bayer, it is widely believed that the pharmaceutical company has failed to adequately warn women, its users, and medical practitioners about the risk that the IUD may suddenly transfer to other parts of the body. Complaints made against Bayer also stressed that the company claims Mirena’s effectiveness even though it is unproven.


Powered by AlterVista