For some, only on the advice of a qualified heart specialist, yes. It depends on you, your particular case, and what the prescribing authority feels is best for your long term health. Amiodarone is generally considered to be the drug of last resort because of its toxicity and its potential to cause damage to organs, including to the heart itself. So, when a patient is placed on amiodarone, it is not done without a lot of consideration about several factors, not least of which is that none of the other widely used anti-arrhythmic drugs is suitable for one reason or another. This would mean that they considered Sotalol, propafenone, diltiazem, Multaq, and Tikosyn, as examples. Sotalol and Tikosyn are potentially dangerous and are often 'loaded' initially under supervision during a short hospital stay of two or three days. So it's not as if amiodarone is the lone bad boy in the group...others carry risks for certain cases as well.

This is just me talking to myself, but I would do whatever it took to get off amiodarone. If it means a pacemaker, so be it. I would also ask for a reasoned calculus as to why not Sotalol or propafenone. Chances are good, though, that the rationale is pretty darned solid, and amiodarone is all that is left. In fact, I was on it for almost ten weeks and did well by it. Luckily, I was told to stop taking it two weeks prior to the Holter monitor check to see if my heart was going to stabilize in normal sinus rhythm (NSR). The story from there is involved and I won't go into it since it isn't relevant, but I was grateful that amiodarone got me out of a horribly persistent AF with high rate and RVR (rapid ventricular response), and it kept me in NSR for weeks until I had to stop it.