The First Federal Paxil Birth Defect Case Has Been Set For Trial — (

SSRI Ed note: Family attempts to sue SmithKlineBeecham for heart defects in their infant caused by Paxil. The case eventually settles.

Original article no longer available see reports that in the case of Hayes v. SmithKline Beecham Corporation, Justice Claire V. Eagan of The United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma, has ordered that the case begin trial on January 20, 2009.

New York, NY (1888PressRelease) October 01, 2008 –, LLC,, reports that one of its member firms, Nix & McIntyre, LLP,, has been ordered by Judge Claire V. Eagan of the United States District Court for the Norther District of Oklahoma, to commence the first federal Paxil Birth Defect trial on January 20, 2009.

The case of Hayes v. SmithKline Beecham Corporation, 07CV-682CVE SAJ, was filed on November 29, 2007. The complaint alleges that Jennifer Hayes took Paxil pursuant to her physician’s orders during the first trimester of her pregnancy. After an uneventful pregnancy the couple went to Jane Phillips Medical Center in their hometown to deliver the baby they would name K.H.

“At delivery, K.H.’s heart beat erratically. Because this is not uncommon, baby K.H. was initially transferred to the nursery for observation. A few hours later, a nurse heard a murmur and baby K.H.’s heart still did not function correctly. Within a few hours, baby K.H. was rushed by Life Flight to St. Francis Children’s Hospital in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Just a few hours after delivery, Jennifer checked out the hospital to be with her baby.”

“At St. Francis, Jennifer Hayes’s and Justin Hayes’s hopes for a healthy baby were quickly dashed. Testing would reveal that baby K.H. suffered from severe pulmonic stenosis. His pulmonic valve was almost entirely closed. A heart catheterization the first day almost killed him. That same day, K.H. underwent his first open-heart surgery. A second surgery a few days later was required to cope with massive fluid build-up around his lungs. A third surgery the second week of life was required to pack down his right diaphragm. On Christmas Eve, K.H. suffered an IV infiltration in his right hand resulting in a severe burn. Debridement and a skin graft followed.”

“In February of 2006, K.H. got pneumonia as a result of pulmonary hypertension caused by his weakened heart. A month stay in the hospital followed. After a brief return home, another hospitalization and heart catheterization followed.”

“Baby K.H. spent the first seven months of his life on a ventilator. Three additional months were spent breathing through a tube in his throat.”

The complaint which also seeks punitive damages alleges that SmithKline Beecham, now known as Glaxo SmithKline, is wholly responsible for the injuries sustained by the infant by their negligence “in its marketing, labeling, and promoting of Paxil.”

In September of 2005, and again in December of 2005, GSK published some compilations of data concerning the epidemiological association or “signal” between Paxil and birth defects. The “relative risk,” which is one barometer by which epidemiologists commonly measure the “strength” of an association, was 2.26. This constitutes more than a doubling of the risk of cardiac defects in infants exposed to Paxil during pregnancy.

Noble McIntyre of Nix & McIntyre, LLP, attorneys for the infant is currently representing about a dozen other children who have suffered similar injuries as result of exposure to Paxil., reports that Glaxo continues to market their product and advise against discontinuing use of Paxil during pregnancy despite the increased risk for birth defects.

If you or someone you know suffers from an injury, birth defects, or other side effects, or if you have lost a loved one due to these dangers, you are not alone and you deserve answers. Make sure to contact the experienced, and knowledgeable birth defect lawyers at