HOW TO ENSURE THAT YOU RECEIVE ALL THE MONEY YOUR PARAGARD INJURY CASE DESERVES
Paragard Lawsuits for Injuries During Removal
Paragard, an intrauterine birth control device (“IUD”) manufactured by CooperSurgical Inc. (“Cooper), is one of two IUDs currently authorized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in the country. Paragard was previously manufactured by Teva Pharmaceuticals (“Teva”), who sold Paragard to Cooper in November 2017 for $1.1 billion.
Numerous women have sustained severe injuries during the Paragard removal procedure. Cooper/Teva’s Paragard is prone to breaking during the removal procedure and can also become embedded in the uterine wall, which requires surgery to remove. Removal surgery could be invasive and the recovery painful. As with any surgery, the woman could experience substantial side effects that could be permanent, such as the need for a hysterectomy or hysteroscopy. Women may also suffer from retained fragments.
What is a Paragard IUD?
The Paragard IUD is a plastic, slender, t-shaped device which is wrapped in a copper wire. Paragard was approved for continuous use up to ten years, if the woman desires. Implantation, although invasive, should be over in a matter of minutes and pain-free. Insertion of Paragard may be done in a doctor’s office during a routine office visit.
Cooper/Teva claims Paragard is 99% effective in preventing unwanted pregnancies and is advantageous to women who ultimately want to become pregnant, because it can be removed with relative ease without long-term repercussions.
The device prevents pregnancy .because the copper wrapping creates inflammation in the uterus, generating a toxic environment for both the sperm and the egg.
The Side Effects and Dangers Associated with Defective Paragard IUD Implants
Paragard is not as safe as the company claims it to be. Many women who chose Paragard as a birth control option now suffer from copper migration and have suffered severe, and even permanent, complications when the device broke during removal or migrated to another place within the body.
Any woman who experiences an injury such as a hysterectomy, needed surgery to find a broken piece from the Paragard IUD, or to remove the device in its entirety and suffered complications from surgery could have legal rights to file a lawsuit against Cooper/Teva. Numerous women who requested Paragard because of the purported safety and convenience may suffer the potential permanent side effects of removal surgery, solely because Cooper/Teva failed to warn patients about the possible repercussions of implanting its device.
The law imposes strict time limits on filing legal claims. Missing this deadline could prevent the victim of a defective Paragard IUD from holding Cooper/Teva responsible. Victims should also be aware that their spouse might also have a claim for damages for loss of consortium. Loss of consortium is also limited by strict time limits.
Cooper/Teva now faces repercussions. Women left injured, scarred, or even unable to conceive after having hysterectomies have filed lawsuits against Cooper alleging the device broke during removal.
Current filings suggest Cooper/Teva knew, both through testing and complaints received from women who experienced the problem, that the device could break before or during the removal procedure.
The evidence that Cooper/Teva knew about the potential risks and took no affirmative measures to warn patients is compelling. The evidence suggests that problems with Paragard are more pervasive than initially believed. A three-year study concluded in 2015, determined that seven women in just one gynecological practice in Chicago Illinois suffered from Paragard complications. Six out of the seven women required surgery to remove the broken piece from their bodies. The other, a 28 year-old woman, underwent a surgery during which doctors were unable to remove the broken Paragard IUD.
The side effects experienced by the women followed in the Chicago study were severe and life-altering. The study reported that when the IUDs broke, the pieces lodged in the uterine wall. The presence of foreign bodies in this ultra-sensitive area caused infections, pain, bleeding, and cramping. Additionally, some of the broken pieces migrated or moved into other organs after perforating the lining of the patient’s uterus.
Cooper/Teva designed Paragard to be removed easily. Paragard has a string affixed to the bottom that hangs down into the uterus. According to the literature accompanying Paragard, the doctor simply needs to pull on the strings. . The arms of the device, which from the “T-shape” should fold upwards, and at that point, the device could be removed. Despite how easily Cooper/Teva claims Paragard removal should be, medical professionals have an exceedingly difficult time removing the device even when strictly adhering to the recommended procedures.
If the device breaks removal of the fragments can only be accomplished during an invasive surgery that can result in a long and painful recuperation. At the outset, doctors must perform an ultrasound to locate the Paragard fragment.. Surgeons, in most circumstances, must make an incision in the uterus to access the broken IUD and remove the fragment. In some cases, the woman had to have a total hysterectomy because doctors could not remove the broken IUD.
Surgery is inherently risky and comes with dangerous side effects. As a result, surgery is often the last resort. However, if there is no other method of removing the broken Paragard, then surgery is the sole option.
How Do I Know if I Have a Case?
As a victim of a defective medical device, you have certain rights. Filing a lawsuit will help you preserve those rights as well as potentially hold Cooper/Teva responsible for the pain, anguish, and suffering endured.
By claiming that Cooper/Teva failed to warn patients of certain risks, a victim and her family could be entitled to monetary damages. Money damages for losses could include medical bills, pain, suffering, mental and emotional anguish, lost wages, future lost earnings, and above all, the possibility that reproduction might never
PARKER WAICHMAN LLP?
Product Liability cases are complicated cases that are typically defended by the manufacturer and the company’s liability insurance company. Parker Waichman LLP is one of very few national law firms who have the resources and experience to calculate the true value of your case and the trial experience necessary to win your case. Our law firm will fight for your maximum compensation.
SPECIAL AWARDS & RECOGNITION WITHIN THE LEGAL COMMUNITY
Parker Waichman LLP has been bestowed with several top honors for quality of representation, professionalism, and integrity. The legal professionals at Parker Waichman LLP care deeply about the needs of our clients and are proud of the firm’s reputation and honors which include:
- A 9 /10 Rating on the popular attorney review website – AVVO.
- A “Preeminent Lawyers” and “AV Peer Review Rating” listing on Martindale-Hubbell®.
- A perfect 5 out of 5 rating on LawDragon.
- A “Best Lawyers” annual publication listing
PARKER WAICHMAN LLP
At Parker Waichman LLP, our Paragard injury lawsuit attorneys are dedicated to helping victims harmed by dangerous medical devices and we will advocate for maximum compensation for your injuries and damages. If you or a loved one used Paragard and subsequently required surgery to remove the implant, contact our law firm today for your free consultation by filling out our online form or by calling 1-800-YOURLAWYER (1-800-968-7529).
Have you or a loved one been harmed by a Paragard IUD implant device?Click To Get A Free Case Review