Depakote Birth-Defect Lawsuit Explained

A group of 28 Plaintiffs has filed a Depakote Birth Defect lawsuit against Abbott Laboratories claiming that their children were born with various birth defects as a direct result of having the anticonvulsant drug Depakote injected into them during the critical stages of development. The drug is also known under various names such as Depakene, and Regaine hydrochloride. It is an FDA-approved drug for seizures and other mental illnesses. It is also used to treat epilepsy, mania, and depression.

Lawyers who are handling the Depakote lawsuit contend that the manufacturer, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), did not conduct proper clinical trials when they offered the drug to patients with seizure disorders.

They further claim that GlaxoSmithKline did not include warnings regarding the possible side effects of this dangerous class of medications. If allowed to go forward, the lawsuit claims that this negligent marketing campaign resulted in the deaths of infants born with developmental disabilities. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of the parents of one of the deceased infants.

The plaintiffs in this Depakote birth defect lawsuit are asking for monetary compensation for the direct and secondary damages resulting from the manufacturer’s negligence. They are also seeking compensation for the direct and secondary medical costs suffered by their child and are asking for punitive damages. GlaxoSmithKline is also being sued for negligence in its failure to provide proper warnings about the risks of this dangerous class of medications. The plaintiffs are asking that a jury award compensate the child’s father for the loss of his son, and for the expenses, he incurred for having to deliver him at a medically supervised facility. This Depakote birth injury lawsuit was filed on behalf of the recently deceased infant.

GlaxoSmithKline manufactures anticonvulsants such as Depakote and is a major manufacturer of prescription medications used to treat epilepsy, high blood pressure, and behavioral problems.

The company’s website claims that these medications are “implanted in the body” and do not contain “any toxins or other chemicals.” The FDA has not approved Depakote for use in treating neuro-epilepsy or other birth defects, and the company is currently under investigation for possible violations of its obligations to provide warnings about the risks of its use. In August, the FDA notified GlaxoSmithKline that it was being investigated for its sales of Depakote to pharmacies in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia, stating that the company failed to comply with regulations concerning the labeling and packaging of Depakote.

Plaintiffs argue that because GlaxoSmithKline did not provide any warnings about the risks of its medication and did not warn that some people are more likely to have a condition associated with their drug, that they have suffered a direct injury due to the medication. As part of their defense, GlaxoSmithKline has introduced documents from the FDA regarding the length of time it took for the agency to approve Depakote. According to GlaxoSmithKline’s documents, the FDA reviewed the drug and gave the company six months to prove that it was safe and effective for use during pregnancy, before requiring the medication to be placed on the market. After reviewing the documentation, the FDA determined that GlaxoSmithKline complied with the requirements and released the drug. According to the plaintiffs, this evidence indicates that GlaxoSmithKline knew about the dangers of Depakote before its release, yet still sold the medication to consumers.

GlaxoSmithKline maintains that since its drug was approved by the FDA in the first trimester, there is no evidence of harm to pregnant women, and therefore, there is no need to compensate for Depakote Birth Defect lawsuit plaintiffs.

Plaintiffs, however, disagree. They argue that many women suffered serious and debilitating defects, as well as a wide range of other defects during their pregnancies, and claim that GlaxoSmithKline should have foreseen these defects and not sold Depakote in the first trimester. GlaxoSmithKline maintains that it did inform plaintiffs of the risk of Depakote’s potential effect on the fetus and that it did supply Prenatal Interfallopian Cream along with Depakote. Furthermore, GlaxoSmithKline maintains that it never intended to cause harm to any of its plaintiffs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *