I agree that the FDA has a lot of crap underneath it that isn't scientifically based. But, one must consider the worst scenario in every prescription written. If the person is antidepressant naive, and God-forbid they do go into fulminant hepatic failure (you'd see the signs anyway), how would you defend yourself in court?
It simply isn't a first line treatment, just as Thorazine or Clozapine is not a first line treatment. Do I start patients on Thorazine or Clozapine as a first choice? Sometimes. But that's in rare and exceptional circumstances (usually). The same would have to go for Serzone. While a lot of the fervor was hype, there is a real danger of this side effect.
Other issues, such as the weight gain, are real and patients complain about it. Silvergirl's vignette is very typical of a patient involved with Serzone. Did poorly, responded well to Serzone, taken off for whatever reason, failed on other ADs, again responded with a rechallenge of Serzone.
Remeron does respond similarly and has the inverse dose/fatigue dose phenomenon, so there are ways to manipulate it to your doing. It is a safer drug than Serzone generally speaking. It also has other, potentially beneficial side effects as well. If a person was taking Serzone, and doesn't want to be on it, I would likely try other ADs with augmentation strategies - depending on their individual presenting symptoms (ruminating thoughts, hypersomnia, etc).
A lot of what we do is not scientifically based - i.e. defensive medicine. All branches of medicine are victims of corporate legal-infused medicine practice. It's not right, but it's our reality for now. I'll say it again - you can get away with a lot with good documentation.