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?

Its the paracetamol in medised that deals with pain so original calpol would help on that front.

As for an itch, your DC is over 2 I think you said so you could give Piriton (chlorphenamine). Although it is an antihistamine and has some sedative properties it doesn't have as bad a side effect profile as diphenydramine. As such it is still licenced for OTC use in your DC's age group.

'Oh and when DD was born, by forceps, they gave her Calpol for 3 days in hospital because the pead said she had a headache. Guess you'd veto that too, huh?'

Did you miss the bits where posters have trued to explain the difference between OTC use and use on prescription. Doctors can even use things 'off licence' in relation to their POM licence by virtue of the fact the drug is being used under medical supervision. A peadatirician is a specialist and your DD was in hospital so being monitored, completely different.

Personally I quite like medised when I am ill so get it for that reason. I have given it to both dcs, dc1 was 'allowed', but by dc2 the recommendation had changed. However if he's suffering with teeth / cold then I give him a dose. He gets lots
Of mini coughs from his older brother (he's 15 months).

Yanbu. I don't see how 2.5ml once ir twice a month is going to harm them.

On a similar note why can't we get baby Orajel here? They sell it in the states, my sister sends it over for me. Crazy.

OP, it feels like you are being demonised, and I am sorry for that.

You asked a question and you got a mixture of responses - from a mixture of people with a mixture of qualifications and experience. The YABUs are, however, the most vocal.

You won't change the minds of those who are slating your actions...and they won't change yours, so it has ceased to be a worthwhile debate IMHO.

However, you are comfortable with your actions, as sanctioned by your GP, and so have no need to convince anyone else of their worth. Nor anyone else you.

We all parent differently. That doesn't make one of us better than another - just different. I, for example, am as good a mum as the next...but I am terrible at ensuring DCs' toenails are cut as regularly as they probably should be (yes, yes, they might get deformed feet or something and I'll be to blame). And we all have different opinions. For example (another one), I did give DCs Medised very occasionally when they were small...and on balance probably would do now even if my DC was below six, if I felt would he/she would benefit from it, but I understand that others might disapprove.

And in return, if I'm honest, I question the judgement of the parents I know who think they are somehow doing their DC a favour by not giving paracetamol or ibuprofen to them when they are ill (talking plain old Calpol, Nurofen etc now). I ask myself, " why would anyone deliberately make their DC suffer more than necessary?" It seems to be a rather cruel principle to me. But I accept that is only my opinion. And that each of our oinions are probably reasonably valid, because we are not talking extremes, abuse or neglect here.

Oh and I meant to add. What honey said further up thread makes a valid point. In use monitoring which is what leads to these changes is a strength of modern medication use. We have learnt many valuable lessons after a drug has been used on the mass market. If that lesson is of too much of a risk then the authorities are legally and morally obligated to do something. Initial testing is good but due to its very nature cannot discover everything. For example Heroin is so called as it was designed as a non addictive alternative to morphine for analgesia. See how wrong they can get it.

Continuing to use something despite new evidence that it is not a good idea would be equal to returning to the days of thalidomide for morning sickness, I am sure nobody wants that.

Oh and btw I asked quite a few of my colleagues and not one of them recommend medised for use in those under 6. So there are plenty of HCPs out there who won't.

I just want it on record that at no point have I suggested that children in pain should not get age appropriate analgesia. If only giving my dd medication that I deem appropriate based on scientific research, legal OTC licences makes me a neglectful mother then I suggest you report me to SS.

Me too Minus. I don't think the use of appropriate drugs has been questioned though

Very well put fourkids. Threads like this go around around in circles because people (understandably!) don't read through the entire thread and re-post what someone else has already said. I think this thread is dying a natural death :)

Minus273, calm down!

No-one said YOU did suggest that "children in pain should not get age appropriate analgesia"

and I actually said "we are NOT talking extremes, abuse or neglect here"

I'm saying this is NOT heroin, tobacco, alcohol or any of the other things being dramatically suggested.

And I'm wondering why people have to be so horrid to each other just because they happen to disagree on something...We all raise an eyebrow occasionally at other people's parenting - when it is different to ours, but unless we are perfect (which none of us are), we probably shouldn't judge too harshly...or IMO too vocally, because one day it'll possibly be us who have asked a question that horrifies others! And unless it was on a par with "is it okay to let my DC who is 3 cross the dual carriageway on his own?" we probably wouldn't quite deserve it.

That said, if one asks AIBU, it is probably U to not accept the answers, positive and negative, and move on, with a few more opinions and a bit more knowledge under one's belt :)

It was me who mentioned Heroin and it was only to illustrate how initial pre-marketing research can miss things and show the value of in use monotoring. There was no serious suggestion that any of the mums on here give it to their DC. Can you also please point out where I was horrid? I did say OP was unreasonable but did say she may not be aware of the information and provided some of that information.

four kids better analogy of AIBU, I think those that are frustrated feel the are being told they are in some way naive or wrong to abide the law and trust experts on the subject.

thank you banana87 :)

It might die a natural death or I might manage to kill it!!!! I reckon the voice of reason and moderation tends to sound the death knoll on AIBU!

BTW, Minus, I believe it was Seeker who came across as one who never medicates and seems to always take her DC to the dr for a snuffle or anything that may require administration of Calpol.

Minus273, do we have a dope problem here? Not the Medised type...the weed type? No I can't point out where you were horrid. I never said you were horrid. Paranpoid maybe :)

Honeydragon, I think this is probably true...and I'm sure those others that are also frustrated feel the are being told they are in some way a wicked, evil, terrible parent.

I'm sure the former are neither naive or wrong (on this point - I can't vouch for any other matters), any more than the latter are a wicked, evil, terrible parent.

Minus273, I accept that I did jokingly just suggest that weed was making you paranoid...and that I won't be able to show you where you said you smoked dope...because AFAIK you didn't!!

I didn't find that joke funny in the slightest. IN fact I find it highly offensive.

paranpoid, by the way, is a newly discovered medical condition similar to paranoia, but caused by stress brought on by AIBU threads rather than the inhalation of illegal substances.

S'alright Minus,fourkids is another sensible one.

My main issue is and always will be that if you lie to a pharmicist, they lose everything. Hence I do feel strongly, as for me its not just about parenting, its about integrity.

"" why would anyone deliberately make their DC suffer more than necessary?""

I don't think anyone allows their child to 'suffer' but some don't medicate at the slightest hint of a fever because they recognise that the fever is actually part of the body's defence against illness. Why suppress your natural immune response unless it is genuinely causing discomfort?

In the case of chickenpox, some studies have shown that administering paracetamol can prolong the length of time it takes for the spots to crust over.

From here

"Another randomized trial that compared paracetamol (10 mg/kg/dose four times per day for four days) with placebo in 72 children with varicella infection showed no significant differences in durations of symptoms (itching, activity, or appetite) but a longer time to total crusting of lesions in children who received paracetamol than in those who received placebo (14)."

bumbleymummy, I am sure you are right. I think it is, again, a matter of personal choice...and common sense and judgement made at the time with all the available facts.

The only thing I would say is that as far as I'm concerned if one of my DC is feeling ill, they are genuinely experiencing discomfort, and I'll take all reasonable steps to alleviate that discomfort/suffering. I know people who never give their DCs pain relief (one even witheld prescribed meds after surgery), and I don't really get it. Not exactly judging, just recognising that, for me, it is a slightly alien response to a child's pain .

So you've asked three different GPs if it's OK for you to sedate your child with Medised and they've all said it's fine.

Really?

Why would you ask three separate medics if it's OK to use a medicine not now recommended for under 6s on your younger-than-6-year-old child? Did you not believe the first one?

I find it hard to believe that 3 GPs would advocate the use of Medised in a very young child. You'd have thought that at least one of them had read the notifications that we all receive via the Drugs Bulletin that most PCTs send round.

ZombieWhirl the use of Bonjela in the under 16s has been discouraged because of one of the ingredients being similar to aspirin - this link explains it more. They now make Bonjela Teething Gel which is different and can be used by under 16s.

The reason that the age was changed is that there is some evidence to show that the antihistamine in medised MAY cause respiratory depression in babies

The evidence is not huge, but there is some there. This meant that raising the age limit is the safest option.

In terms of gps giving the go ahead to use it. Medised is not licensed and can not be prescribed on the nhs as it's efficacy is unclear for any age
A gp could recommend use of this treatment based on a reasonable risk assessment - knowledge of potential dangers, chance of side effects, benefit of treatment etc

Hope this helps

"BTW, Minus, I believe it was Seeker who came across as one who never medicates and seems to always take her DC to the dr for a snuffle or anything that may require administration of calpol"

Not even going to dignify that with an answer. Reasonable people with some intelligence on this thread will know it's crap. You, whatever I, and, more importantly, , medically qualified people say,will continue to do a stupid and potentially dangerous thing because you know best.

Am not coming out for or against medised but why is it that any time there is a mention of giving a sick child something to help them sleep, the assumption is that it is for the parent's benefit? What about the child - they have a miserable night and feel grim the next day, which in turn will mean they take longer to get over their illness. I gave medised to my DD very occasionally when she had a very bad cold(before the guidelines changed) when I though SHE would benefit from a more restful nights sleep (and it worked very well for her). I don't see it's any more irresponsible than using an analgesic - the child is in discomfort. Not all of us are doing it so our dinner parties are not disturbed.

Giddly because some parents were

Nothing wrong with sedatives at all. But Medised isn't guaranteed to make a child sleep or rest, it can just as easily prevent it. depends on the child

Nothing wrong with sedatives? I think you mean antihistamines.
I certainly don't think temazepam would be suitable for a baby/child
Erm I would read my last post re antihistamines
They are definitely not completely safe

But I personally have been made out to give it for my benefit (see Seekers post above), so I'm sure other parents who also use it have been made to feel that way as well.