[Judgmentality]

> The real comparison would be between SSRI-treated patients and untreated depressed patients, because healthy people aren't prescribed SSRIs.

I see it very differently, as you are focusing entirely on the parents and completely ignoring the children. If the untreated patients weren't going to have kids, the question is only whether or not the children are happy. If the children of parents with antidepressants are more likely to require antidepressants themselves, I'd say that's indicative of a serious problem.

[PragmaticPulp]

> If the children of parents with antidepressants are more likely to require antidepressants themselves, I'd say that's indicative of a serious problem.

I'm not aware of any evidence that this is the case. Do you have any evidence, or are you speculating worst case scenarios?

Regardless, I think it's shortsighted and in poor taste to suggest that there is a problem with parents on SSRIs having children, particularly without any evidence to support your claims.

[Judgmentality]

Everything I'm saying is speculation. I'm asking questions, not providing evidence one way or the other. I never said there was a problem.

[imwillofficial]

So it is now verboten to ask questions?

SSRIs vs Untreated depression is a false dichotomy. There are many treatments for depression.

[msrenee]

Some cases of depression and especially bipolar disorder seem to have a genetic component. Parents that are on SSRIs, SNRIs, antipsychotics and atypical antipsychotics are probably already much more likely to have children who have the same conditions and need antidepressants, as the underlying condition often has a genetic component.

[bawolff]

You don't think having a parent with untreated depression is bad for child development?