Author: Angel Reyes  

Espanol, In The News

shutterstock_85816090-200x299Recently, I spoke to a Reyes Browne Reilley Law Firm transvaginal mesh client who was very upset. She had just visited with her doctor, who had admonished our client regarding her mesh case. He adamantly claimed that women who have bladder slings are not having complications due to mesh implants and many attorneys are only trying to profit from fictional problems they associate with the mesh.

Confused and angry, she called me up in arms; she felt as if she might be stuck forever with medical problems stemming from an unknown source and wanted to drop out of her lawsuit. Ever since I spoke to her, the conversation has been weighing on my mind.

Some Medical Professionals Still Do Not See A Transvaginal Mesh Linkage?

I do understand skepticism about product liability cases, such as the transvaginal mesh cases, because I grew up with a father who is a physician. Such lawsuits against products utilized for medical purposes at times were frowned upon in my house. That being said, as a grown woman who now has two children of my own to protect and who talks to and represents woman all over the country in dangerous drug and defective medical device cases, I have a very different perspective than once was imparted on me as a child.

My change in perspective came from many sources, but it grew as I began speaking to women all over the country firsthand about the complications they faced as a result of their mesh. Their stories, backed up by their medical records, are similar and heartbreaking. For some women, the story is as simple as they had surgery that did not work and have to figure out next steps. For others, the story is more complicated – they are living with pain, infections, an inability to have relations with their husbands, mesh adhesions to organs and much much more.

Another reason my perspective changed is that I began to gather more and more information about the facts of this case. For instance, when I heard one of the Defendant manufacturers purchased the material used for the bladder slings from Chevron and used it in women even after they were told it was not supposed to be used in a human body, I was very disturbed. To make matters worse, even though Chevron stopped selling the manufacturer their product when they learned it was being used as a bladder sling, the same Defendant manufacturer created sham corporations and purchased the same material in order to continue using it in the bladder slings they produced instead of finding a safer alternative to use in its place.

Ignoring the above information is not an acceptable option for me. I do not want more women to develop autoimmune disorders because a company used a product not fit to be placed in a human body. I do not want my clients to have to live with constant urinary tract infections and pain. I want the products off the market, and the only way to get them removed is if enough people with the product sue the manufactures and make them understand the complications women with mesh face each day.

After hearing my client’s plight, I had to write something to assure other women that the problems they face due to having bladder slings are real, and I do not believe one doctor’s opinion makes their injuries fictional. Many doctors do believe the mesh is harmful and many doctors are removing it.

There are many attorneys, like myself, that focus on this area of law because we truly believe that manufacturers need to have accountability for the products they place on the market, especially when those products are being placed into a human being. Transvaginal mesh manufacturers are not an exception. They too must be held responsible for making this product and for the injuries that have ensued from its use.

If you or a loved one are suffering from complications arising from a ‘sling’ or ‘mesh’, seek multiple medical opinions and please seek legal counsel from a defective medical device attorney like the ones at Reyes Browne Reilley Law Firm. If you’d like a free and confidential mesh consultation, feel free to call me (Brooke Cohen) at 214-526-7900, or submit the short Case Review form on the right, or email me directly at [email protected].

Previous Post Next Post