to give medised/calpol night even though the age has changed?

[banana87]

DD is 2.11. I have given her Medised as needed from 1 year, as well as Calpol night as needed from 2 yrs. AS NEEDED means if she's ill, we've not given it to her just to get her to sleep. I was a nanny when Medised was ok from 3 months which is why I have given it after they changed the age.

I've told the GP this and they agree that it's fine if she needs it, but I've been made to feel like a really irresponsible parent by friends who say I shouldn't give it to her as she's under 6.

AIBU?

I do wonder about GPs sometimes - since these medicines are officially not for under 6yos, how on earth can they say that parents should continue to use them.

I would go by the official recommendation before believing a GP any day.

GPs aren't allowed to prescribe Medised or cough mixtures so by telling parents to use them, they're effectively telling them to break the law and putting the pharmacist in an awkward position when he/she refuses to sell it for a child under 6.

I just lie. If I believe she should have it and that the reasons for not selling it are not valid (to me), then I lie about her age. I'm sure I'm not the only one. And I'm sure pharmacists know it too.

How do you decide if the pharmaceutical comapny and licensing body had valid reasons for withdrawing it. The pharmaceutical comapny and licensining body are experts on drugs, and specialist will have dealt wiht this particular drug so they would only withdraw it for valid resons.
And when people talk about the risk of overdosing, it normally means it is easy for a child to be overdosed on the reccomended doses, as they are so much smaller rather than there was a risk parents gave them extra doses.

I'm with Seeker on this. Karvol, Calpol and Calprofen have always been enough for my two, despite some horrendous colds in their time. Of course they don't sleep as well as usual when they're ill - same as with adults, you just have to accept it's part of life.

other than the obvious colds and pain relief am a bit shocked at a few posters saying they give it go get the kids a good night sleep. thats awful!!

"I just lie. If I believe she should have it and that the reasons for not selling it are not valid (to me), then I lie about her age. I'm sure I'm not the only one. And I'm sure pharmacists know it too."

Bizarre. Just bizarre.

why not take the approach of a warm bath, warm drink, vicks, karvol plug in and a story .... instead of drugging them to sleep!

am seriously shocked here!

I think it's probably safe to say that those that wouldn't will judge those that would, and those that would will judge those that wouldn't for judging them...

for those that would...and those that wouldn't but would judge those that would...this is an excerpt from meditrina's link:

"Products with old labelling that give doses for children under six won't be immediately withdrawn from sale, because there are no immediate safety issues with them and they have been in wide use for decades."

So, no need to have an all-out panic, i don't think!!

It seems the licence was changed in part to reflect a lack of research into the product's use in children under six...a bit like the removal of tons of veterinary medicines because the research hasn't been done on animals (only humans), and it isn't financially worthwhile doing it.

*I do wonder about GPs sometimes - since these medicines are officially not for under 6yos, how on earth can they say that parents should continue to use them.

I would go by the official recommendation before believing a GP any day.*

You do realise that the majority of drugs used in small children aren't actually licenced for that purpose, dont you? The usual reason for this is cost. For each group (adults, children, under 6, infants), indication (eg pain, relief of fever, allergy) they have to have a separate licence, and this involves trials, beaurocracy etc. They also need a separate licence for each method of sale, eg prescription only, pharmacy, general sales list. In many/most cases, the drug companies decide it's simply not worth getting a licence for use in children. That doesn't mean they aren't safe, in most cases, but the drug companies won't take responsibity if something goes wrong. There is often long experience of use of various drugs, and the company wont 'officially' endorse it, but they are frequently used.

Doctors are well aware of this. As a GP, if I could only prescribe things that are actually licenced in kids I'd have a very small list to choose from!

By the way, to suggest that a child who is ill enough to need calpol (or even to be honest, medised) is by necessity ill enough to see a GP is rather daft. Plenty of kids just have a bit if a snotty nose and a sore throat and are bunged up and not sleeping well but are otherwise quite well. If I saw all of them I'd have no time to do anything else! If a child is unwell, or the parent is worried, of course. Always happy to see them. But please, especially as we are getting to winter, not every well but snotty child...

"Have your friends said you're irresponsible? Or just made you feel that way? If the latter, how?"

Yes, one in particular. She obviously felt so strongly about it that she branded me a child abuser and messaged all of our mutual friends on FB telling them so.

Just last week when DD had HFM the GP prescribed her a mouthwash that is not recommended for children. Irresponsible of the GP? I think not. More likely to do with licensing as others have said.

But not all GPs receive or read information from the drug safety watchdogs, or use the BNF so not all of them are up to date. If you are worried th ebest place to get advice if from the pharmaceutical companies helpline, or the drug safety watchdog in your country.

Diazepam
I do realise that, but in this case it has been withdrawn from sale for that age group, for a certain reason. So I would stick to that.

At the same time, banana, for your friend to brand you a child abuser and post on fb about you, is absolutely bang out of order. WTF is that all about?

I didn't say that a child I'll enough to need calpol was I'll enough to see the doctor.mI said a child I'll enough to need Medised probably was. But I don't see that a snotty nose and being a bit bunged up warrants caplol either.

YABU, (although perhaps were unaware of the information) the age change was not just because of accidental overdosage that the age guidelines were changed.

One of the ingredients in medised and calpol night was implicated in some deaths in America. Children appear to be more susceptible to the side effects of the ingredient (diphenhydramine) which can include paradoxical excitation and more seriously seizures and arrhythmias. Initial studies led to the hypotheisis that the risk was dose dependent. However more recent studies have suggested that rather than being dose dependent the risk may be related to a certain enzyme deficiency which put some children at greater risk. As this is rarely diagnosed unless there is a problem after exposure to a drug like this it is highly unlikely a person or parent would know about this deficiency. Young children are further at risk as they are usually unable to adequately describe any warning symptoms they may experience.

At present there is further research being carried out, in the meantime other research suggested that any benefit would be marginal at best when compared to paracetamol and inhalant decongestant. Therefore the MHRA made a decision to change the guidelines on the basis of a risk to benefit ratio.

IMO it is not worth the potential risk. My dd is 6 now but I still wouldn't risk it tbh.

BTW lying about your child's age to buy it could be enough to get the pharmacist struck off.

As to your friend posting that on FB, not much of a friend.

"But I don't see that a snotty nose and being a bit bunged up warrants calpol either."

Fair enough, that's your opinion. There are two different types of parents: some medicate for most things, others only for more serious things. Neither is wrong, just personal choice.

I think sleep is essential to getting better when you're ill - DD sleeps a full night with medised and seems happier/healthier for it.

She said you're a child abuser on Facebook? The problem is rather obvious then.

domedon me too, although from now on I think I will keep that little secret to myself...

i give medised for my two but only as a last resort when everything else fails . ifind that it clears their snot up and allows them to have a good night of deep sleep which is what ill little people need . by the way i gave my last lot about three months ago when my dd had a really bad cold and was cutting her molars at the time so some medised was given and she went through the night snot free and pain free

Don't worry Lady I know :) She was promptly deleted and I've never looked back (this was a year ago).