Changes to NCAA Medical Disqual Policy

[javadoc]

So what would you do to change it?

What gets me is that the NCAA apparently gives the team-appointed doctor sole and absolute discretion on who can play and who can't. Is that really in the best interests of the student-athletes, which the NCAA is supposedly all about? Isn't it more of a sop to the programs, as a CYA/liability move?

I'd say that there should be some form of waiver in place whereby the athlete and his family have final say, with outside medical input encouraged if needed. It should be primarily the responsibility of the player to decide what happens with his football career. That's a starting point, anyway.

And really, who doesn't know that football is dangerous? It's not like these players picked up a ball suddenly and decided to give it a go at age 18. I think we can assume a starting baseline of general knowledge about the risks involved.

 

[Bayside44]

If anyone thinks "football" (and I say this universally from Pop Warner to the NFL) is going to do a 180 and have less control of who plays and how they practice due to medical reports, etc, they're just not paying attention.

 

[dasher]

So what would you do to change it?

What gets me is that the NCAA apparently gives the team-appointed doctor sole and absolute discretion on who can play and who can't. Is that really in the best interests of the student-athletes, which the NCAA is supposedly all about? Isn't it more of a sop to the programs, as a CYA/liability move?

I'd say that there should be some form of waiver in place whereby the athlete and his family have final say, with outside medical input encouraged if needed. It should be primarily the responsibility of the player to decide what happens with his football career. That's a starting point, anyway.

And really, who doesn't know that football is dangerous? It's not like these players picked up a ball suddenly and decided to give it a go at age 18. I think we can assume a starting baseline of general knowledge about the risks involved.

What player would DQ them self with a concussion before a big game? Young people have to be protected sometimes from themselves.

 

[dollarbill44]

What player would DQ them self with a concussion before a big game? Young people have to be protected sometimes from themselves.

Exactly. And since they are (almost) all over 18, their parents legally have no say in whether or not the athlete signs the waiver.

 

[sufandu]

Regardless of whether we like the decisions or not, it is up to the University to decide who makes those decisions and how they are made. They've decided to err way on the cautious end of the scale. It's not gonna change anytime soon.

I'm more ok with the concussion decisions than this latest case. It seems SC got screwed over by the training staff and the discovery of the gene is the scapegoat.

 

[Consigliere]

There IS no NCAA policy to my knowledge and that may be part of the discussion. SHOULD there be a standard policy or process? Right now I believe it is up to the individual school to make the determination. The result of that is you can have a player disqualified at one school shopping for another school that is less risk adverse. Should the NCAA establish a medical clearinghouse where an athlete who is preliminarily DQ'd at one school can go for expert examination? Then the NCAA underwrites any risk with allowing the athlete to play? Seems like this works in the athlete's best interest in so many ways.

 

[CuseLegacy]

There IS no NCAA policy to my knowledge and that may be part of the discussion. SHOULD there be a standard policy or process? Right now I believe it is up to the individual school to make the determination. The result of that is you can have a player disqualified at one school shopping for another school that is less risk adverse. Should the NCAA establish a medical clearinghouse where an athlete who is preliminarily DQ'd at one school can go for expert examination? Then the NCAA underwrites any risk with allowing the athlete to play? Seems like this works in the athlete's best interest in so many ways.

Athletics Health Care Administration Best Practices

 

[Shark58]

a review/arbitration process with a panel of 5 hyper-qualified medical specialists in the area of injury concern and 100% impartial doctors on the panel. majority decision is final (for all schools, not just the one who suspended the player over medical concerns), along with some kind of waiver/indemnification (from the player & family) should the ruling allow them to keep competing

 

[DeGrozz]

The issue with having 1 doctor make the final call is that there is no reason to not be extremely conservative. Let's face it, we live in a litigious society. If you clear a kid that is a 1 in 10,000 risk and that 1 time happens, I'm guessing that opens you (and the school) up to a potentially huge liability.

 

[Bambrewer]

I'll give you an example of how screwed up this process is. Google how many athletes died of complications of the gene disorder Steven has. Now google players who died of complications of sickle cell.. I was able to find 1 case linked to factor v and a lot of cases of deaths from sickle cell issues.

 

[Scooch]

Only proper thing to do is to leave it to a vote on the most-trafficked fan message board of each program. They always know best. Doctors, schmoctors.

 

[Consigliere]

Athletics Health Care Administration Best Practices

Read that but it seems more focused on how to set up the interaction between the medical staff and trainers and guiding principles than actionable standards. I'm thinking of more concrete clinical standards, some type of appeals process that protects both he student athlete and the institution if an NCAA backed panel advises that medical DQ is an overreaction and something that builds consistency from school to school so an athlete DQ'ed from one institution isn't faced with the need to disrupt his education and shop for a program that will accept the medical risk.

 

[javadoc]

Only proper thing to do is to leave it to a vote on the most-trafficked fan message board of each program. They always know best. Doctors, schmoctors.

The question is whose interests are the doctors protecting?

 

[bnoro]

The question is whose interests are the doctors protecting?

They are protecting the interests of Syracuse University, as they should be? Why is this an argument? If the school is worried about the issue than they shouldn't let him play, plain and simple.

If Steven wants to take that risk elsewhere because he thinks he isn't at risk, he absolutely should, and Syracuse wouldn't stop him. But it would be ridiculous for SU to not protect its interests, regardless of what the fans think.

 

[upperdeck]

people join the military with a pretty good risk of getting hurt or killed. they know it going in, why is a player who has a slight chance of a random event happening more significant? they identified it, they even admit he probably could play at other schools, understand the risk and then stay on top of it and be prepared as you can for it. this isnt something where its 50/50 and probably will happen in a bad way.. its something that had he not had the other issue probably never even gets dealt with here at SU,

 

[CuseLegacy]

My issue isn't with Syracuse or any other university being able to protect their interests but rather how the NCAA has implemented this process.
The process is too one sided and not in the best interest of the student athlete. The decision should not rest in the hands of one person with no health care advocate or appeal process available to the player.
Especially since doctors, like most people, are not infallible and have biases.

 

[bcubs9497]

They are protecting the interests of Syracuse University, as they should be? Why is this an argument? If the school is worried about the issue than they shouldn't let him play, plain and simple.

If Steven wants to take that risk elsewhere because he thinks he isn't at risk, he absolutely should, and Syracuse wouldn't stop him. But it would be ridiculous for SU to not protect its interests, regardless of what the fans think.

Two things to keep in mind. First, back in November, Steven's leg was placed into an XL knee brace and overly tightened by someone on staff. Clotting then occurred where the belts contacted Steven's leg. Second, in April, he was taken off Xarelto even though, according to the attending hematologist (DiFino, not ours), clotting was still present. These two things have been brought to the attention of the AD.

 

[Scooch]

people join the military with a pretty good risk of getting hurt or killed. they know it going in, why is a player who has a slight chance of a random event happening more significant? they identified it, they even admit he probably could play at other schools, understand the risk and then stay on top of it and be prepared as you can for it. this isnt something where its 50/50 and probably will happen in a bad way.. its something that had he not had the other issue probably never even gets dealt with here at SU,

Right, college sports and the military are totally the same thing.

 

[upperdeck]

no but liability issues are

 

[bcubs9497]

Right, college sports and the military are totally the same thing.

They're not. No IEDs, artillery, bombs, gunfire, napalm, etc on a football field. No lawyers on a battlefield.

 

[Cheriehoop]

no but liability issues are

Can't sue the federal government. Big difference. My husband was tboned by a postal vehicle who went through a stop sign about 25 years ago. There's a limited way - only through the federal tort claim act but good luck , you can only go through a federal court and few lawyers unless it's a huge case will take it on a contingency basis.