Should the marketing of adult drugs for use on children be considered madness or an appropriate social practice?

Drug companies consistently push to have the FDA review their data of the effects of their drugs on adults and then request to expand the drug to be used on children.

Regardless of the FDA approval, physicians are free to prescribe medicines as they feel appropriate, there is no requirement they inform parents that the drug has not yet been approved by the FDA for use on children.  This ability for drug companies to circumvent the FDA review and make money on the disbursement of drugs to children should come with an increased liability.

It should be noted that the main difference between adults and children using the same prescribed medicine is frequency of the effects and its long term effect on the child’s development.  So I ask, are the risks worth it?  Unless there is clear evidence showing that the vast majority of the children have gained more benefit from this non child use approved drug then an approved children drug, then the answer should be “no”.

I agree there are some children where all other treatments have failed and alternative treatment should be considered.  However, the parents and the physician should be required in writing spell out the intent of the alternative treatment and show that other evidence base treatments have failed or place the child at risk.  (such as an allergic reaction)

The issuing of medications for children should not be done to improve the ease of others in dealing with a child.  The specifics of a child’s well being, development and growth should be documented and linked to what behavior or medical condition the medication is expected to address to enable the outcomes to be achieved.

Thousands of nonprofits throughout the country provide services to children and do not experiment with drugs on children and are not allowed to experiment on children.  The evidence base practice protocols of nonprofits is what the FDA should adopt for Physicians.