Parents whose premature infants were diagnosed with NEC after being fed Similac and Elecare lawsuit baby formulas are filing lawsuits against the manufacturers.
If you or a loved one may be considering filing a toxic baby formula case, continue reading to learn about the growing litigation, the link between baby formula and dangerous symptoms in premature infants and what claimants need to understand before moving forward with a lawsuit.
Why are People Filing Baby Formula Lawsuits?
Parents of premature babies who were fed formula in the hospital are filing Similac lawsuits against manufacturer Abbott Laboratories, and Enfamil lawsuits against manufacturer Mead Johnson, for failing to warn parents and medical providers about the risks associated with their baby formulas.
Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) is a severe gastrointestinal condition that primarily affects premature and medically fragile infants, according to the NEC Society. It causes intestinal inflammation that results in serious complications, and although many babies fully recover, NEC can cause lifelong neurological and nutritional complications or death.
Research since the 1990s reports that premature babies fed with cow milk-based baby formulas were at a significantly higher risk of developing NEC than those fed human milk exclusively, and that the risks were lower in breastfed babies than those fed a combination of human milk and formula.
Many medical malpractice lawsuits have been filed against the doctors who prescribed Similac and Enfamil, and families have won significant verdicts and settlements as a result. Now, an increasing number of parents are filing product liability lawsuits and suing the manufacturers for producing toxic baby formulas.
Parents are claiming that Abbott Laboratories and Mead Johnson knew or should have known about the potential risks associated with their products, specifically the component of cow’s milk called bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) that could cause NEC, sepsis, failure to thrive or other dangers to premature infants. They also argue that the companies failed to learn more about the potential dangers of their products and neglected to warn the public, despite warnings from influential medical groups.
Plaintiffs also argue that Abbott Laboratories and Mead Johnson marketed their products as safe and beneficial for premature infants in spite of the potential risks, have no warnings about NEC as a side effect of baby formula and do not offer proper instructions or guidelines for their products’ use.
Abbot Laborites and Mead Johnson deny these formulas cause NEC and other complications. They claim gastrointestinal disease is “naturally occurring” and can develop in premature babies who are fed breast milk. They also argue that claims regarding premature infant formulas are not permitted by the Infant Formula Act, established in 1980 to assure all infant formula is nutritionally adequate.
