It is my opinion the reason the drugs are being so widely used is that Informed Consent is not happening a majority of the time. The reason I have this opinion, is my own experience as the parent of a son who has been prescribed psychiatric drugs off label, and speaking to countless other parents who report the same experience and sense of betrayal due to not being informed of the known serious risks of the drugs by the medical professionals who prescribed them. I sincerely doubt that so many children would be taking dangerous psychiatric drugs if parents were in fact being given appropriate, relevent unbiased information on both the diagnoses and the psychiatric drugs given to their child.
There is no doubt in my mind, that I would have never have consented to giving any neuroleptic, or 'antipsychotic' drugs to my son who was emotionally and behaviorally disturbed due to being the victim of a violent crime. There is no way in hell I would have consented, much less, given him the drugs myself--IF I had been told what was known about the drugs at the time they were prescribed. I had to learn through research I have done on my own....It is one of my greatest sorrows that in my ignorance, I made sure my son took the drugs prescribed... My overwhelming sense of betrayal is devastating; these drugs have caused my precious son further harm; and according to my son, further traumatized him. The drugs have disabled my son; and there is no comfort in knowing that it is not my fault. I relied on misinformation given to me by the prescribing medical 'professionals' who have acted unethically with impunity.
My opinions and observations on this topic should not be construed to be a judgement of the nameless professional quoted, or the quality of care the professional provides to patients---in truth, I know only that the conversation in fact occurred; and that it greatly disturbed me.
" "off-label" use is legal and is not experimental use"
"Not validated by thin air- but by extrapolation and empirical practice- much of medicine is still an art"
Since when does that mean people can be misled, coerced and manipulated in order to be 'effectively treated?' The 'neuro-biological disease paradigm' that is being crammed down our necks, is derived from or more accurately survived the supposed end of the Eugenics movement. All of the coercive manipulative psycho-education type of 'treatments' used in Standard Practice INCLUDING the Court Mandated treatment, using CPS, Police and the Courts is exactly how eugenics is done. Here and now. It was done in Germany by the Third Reich, it is also done, here and now, in this country.
Lets remember, to be 'evidence-based' prescription practices for drugs treatment and recommendations for them should be derived from the Clinical Trial Data; not based solely on anecdotal evidence and a consensus of subjective opinions. "Off label" prescriptions are (theoretically) to be based on some scientific empirical data. e.g. using a safe and efficacious drug to treat either a condition or a population for which the drug has not yet been FDA approved based on the fact that the drugs have been used effectively and safely to treat another diagnosis or population. Off label prescriptions were not supposed to become Standard Practice just because prescribers have the 'legal' option! e.g. adult to pediatric use of drugs approved for adults or drugs approved for symptoms of psychosis prescribed to extinguish aggressive behavior. In the case of neuroleptics, they are 'effectively treating' a minority of the patients who have psychosis for which the drugs were initially FDA-approved, a fact that should cause any reasonable person--including medical professionals to ask, "why are teratogenic drugs being used so prolifically and indiscriminately in Standard Clinical Practice?"
"TEOSS study- specific for early onset schizophrenia- doesn't account for use for atypicals 4 other diagnoses- eg mood disorders"
That is EXACTLY my point! Clinical standard practices and treatment protocols are not based on clinical trial evidence! Clinical trials are being conducted to validate standard practice already in use--which is backwards--and driven by the growing criticism of psychiatry's qquestionable claims and methods and the harm being done to people who permanently disabled and die as a result or it.
"you are citing ONE small study- extensive database on neuroleptics"
Apparently, without even realizing it, the doctor is making my point. TEOSS doesn't account for the widespread use of neuroleptic drugs in the pediatric population; no studies do. There is no ethical medical rationale or evidence base supporting use of the drugs in the pediatric population, nonetheless, it has been standard practice for decades. The purpose of the TEOSS Drug Trial was to validate the Standard Practice of using the the newer Atypical drugs as First Line treatment for early on-set schizophrenia; to show that the newer more expensive "Atypicals" were safer and more effective, than the older, cheaper drugs. The results? The newer drugs are not safer, nor are they more effective. A small percentage of the patients were effectively treated--12%. Significantly, the newer drugs tested in TEOSS were subsequently FDA approved for pediatric use based on research conduted in other countries...
How many parents whose children are given these drugs--for any diagnosis--are told that more than 1 but less than 2 out of 100 treated may die; or that 50 % percent of the children who take neurolepic drugs are expected to develop Tardive Dyskinesia, an untreatable neurological condition which can be permanent and disabling; even if the drug is stopped? I have not met a single one yet! I am appalled and totally disgusted when parents tell me of the high cholesterol, obesity, diabetes and heart issues their child has; yet are unaware that these are known adverse effects of the drug prescribed to their child!
"Truth is about risk vs benefit-- no intervention in medicine is 100 % risk free"
Why is it that instead of responding to issues of Informed Consent and the lack of EVIDENCE justifying prescribing psychiatric drugs for behavioral or social problems using what are teratogenic drugs, every single medical professional I have encountered has avoided the issue altogether, or pointed out that there is no risk-free medical treatments? Rationalization and justification are avoidance techniques/behaviors. Once a professional gets to the point that they cannot rationally put forth a valid argument defending their opinion; that is, an evidence-based defense for "off-label" prescribing of psychiatric drugs; or even validate the FDA-approved uses, it becomes crystal clear: It is, it appears, because they NEVER considered that relying on "peer-reviewed" journals for information may mean they are misinformed! If professionals rely on professional journal articles which offer a biased reporting of the data, and use Treatment Protocols and algorithms based on a consensus of subjective opinions instead of empirical data, they are not serving their patient's best interest. The reality is: the recommendations from psychiatry's expert consensus guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of psychiatric diagnoses are rarely supported by empirical evidence of diagnostic validity or treatment effectiveness and safety; but do provide effective support to an extremely successful marketing agenda...
I can understand why professionals would rely on these sources; however, in light of what is now common knowledge about the basis, e.g. validity, of these sources, it is unacceptable for professionals to continue to unquestioningly rely upon them. Some professionals purposely avoid examining their own treatment of patients in this manner due to confidence in their peers; but patient trust and medical ethics are not built on a professionals confidence in their peers, or risk-free treatments. It is based on ethically providing competent and therapeutic care with due diligence of duty. Patients deserve to be told the truth about what their diagnosis is based upon, and factual information about the possible benefits and potential risks of the treatment their doctor is recommending! When the patient is a child, their parents deserve to be given accurate information so that they can perform their sacred duty to protect their own child.