Bayer's Mirena IUD Targeted in MDL

Scores of women claim they weren't warned of IUD's risks.

, The National Law Journal

   | 0 Comments

Kelli Baugh's menstrual cramps were becoming severe. Sex was extraordinarily painful, and no amount of feminine products could stanch her excessive bleeding. So in 2006, she went to her doctor, who suspected her symptoms might be related to an intrauterine contraceptive device she had had implanted the year before. It was called a Mirena.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

Originally appeared in print as Attorneys Lining up with Mirena IUD Claims Latest MDL targets Bayer's Mirena IUD

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1367756309352

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.