Syracuse football defensive tackle Steven Clark's career put in jeopardy by blood clots

[jgeorge322]

It's not a court of law. He is not being asked to explain complex matters beyond common understanding to lay people.
He's a doctor being asked to render a medical opinion. For that, he is qualified.

This is hilarious. Amazing how assinine people are on this board. If you arent a lawyer, then dont speak. The dude is a medical doctor. He can give medical opinions in the court of law.

 

[illi3]

This is kind of getting out of hand. All of these things can be true at the same time:
1) Dr. Tucker is fully qualified to be the individual that makes these decisions
2) Dr. Tucker tends to be more on the cautious side.
3) Dr. Tucker can legitimately have the student athletes best interest at heart in his decisions.
4) The athlete and the athletes family can strongly disagree with his final decision for many reasons.

It is what it is at this point. I'm disappointed for Steven (and I think he's going to be dominant somewhere else if he chooses that route). I'm in healthcare and work with many professional athletes/teams, and can say that I don't necessarily agree with the decision based of the info we have been publicly given, but that doesn't mean that there is some nefarious CYA work going on by the University.

 

[OrangeMojo]

This is kind of getting out of hand. All of these things can be true at the same time:
1) Dr. Tucker is fully qualified to be the individual that makes these decisions
2) Dr. Tucker tends to be more on the cautious side.
3) Dr. Tucker can legitimately have the student athletes best interest at heart in his decisions.
4) The athlete and the athletes family can strongly disagree with his final decision for many reasons.

It is what it is at this point. I'm disappointed for Steven (and I think he's going to be dominant somewhere else if he chooses that route). I'm in healthcare and work with many professional athletes/teams, and can say that I don't necessarily agree with the decision based of the info we have been publicly given, but that doesn't mean that there is some nefarious CYA work going on by the University.

Just because the three items you listed for Dr Tucker CAN be true, doesn't mean that they ARE true. And while you are entitled to your opinion, my opinion is that a 70 year old GP in Syracuse is probably not the best person to be the final arbiter of these types of medical issues. If the player had pneumonia - right in doc Tucker's wheelhouse - but IMO he is not the proper "expert" to be the final say on these types of issues.

 

[dan7800]

Too bad. He was a very good player, and seems to be a fine young man.

Here's to hoping this doesn't lead to anything more serious.

Best of luck to Steven, and he will always be a member of OrangeNation.

 

[UGHV]

You can sue for what ever you want. Getting a judge to hear the case is a different story... winning the case is another. But plenty of people have sued for being burnt by hot coffee... falling down and breaking a leg after breaking and entering into someone's house or my favorite because Starbucks said 16 ounces and ice takes up most of my drink. There have been many lawsuits against schools for players dying during practice from unknown medical conditions. It only takes getting the right judge to hear your case. I would bet a good lawyer could present a decent case for loss of future wages for disqualifying a kid who was at minimal risk of a future issue.

I took a law class where we discussed several of these lawsuits. My personal favorite was the guy who put his RV on cruise control then went in the back to chill. He won the lawsuit because it didn't clearly state what cruise control did in the manual.

 

[illi3]

Just because the three items you listed for Dr Tucker CAN be true, doesn't mean that they ARE true. And while you are entitled to your opinion, my opinion is that a 70 year old GP in Syracuse is probably not the best person to be the final arbiter of these types of medical issues. If the player had pneumonia - right in doc Tucker's wheelhouse - but IMO he is not the proper "expert" to be the final say on these types of issues.

I don't disagree, but my point is that you can not prove they ARE true so why don't we all calm down and focus on the small amount that we do know. All the hypothetical BS is getting tired. I find it amazing that folks here with no skin in the game other than enjoying a few Saturdays in the fall are reacting more immaturely to the decision that the damn Clarks appear to be.

 

[illi3]

Tucker is not a vascular specialist, which is true. Thankfully they didn't ask him to diagnose or treat the condition. If you want to be mad at someone, be mad at the local vascular guy (the name escapes me, so I apologize) who provided Tucker with the clinical info.

edit: Apologies as well to the poster I quoted before. As I re-read things, my post comes off far more aggressive and conflict minded than it was meant to be. I'm not heated, I swear

 

[chugg21]

View attachment 99856 Liability, Lawyers & Litigation... Taken at spring training 2017.

Think thats more because people are too dumb to not stare at their phone instead of the game.

 

[bcubs9497]

Tucker is not a vascular specialist, which is true. Thankfully they didn't ask him to diagnose or treat the condition. If you want to be mad at someone, be mad at the local vascular guy (the name escapes me, so I apologize) who provided Tucker with the clinical info.

edit: Apologies as well to the poster I quoted before. As I re-read things, my post comes off far more aggressive and conflict minded than it was meant to be. I'm not heated, I swear

Santo DiFino. He's not a vascular surgeon; he's a hematologist.

 

[007]

Santo DiFino. He's not a vascular surgeon; he's a hematologist.

It would appear to me that Dr. DiFino's expert opinion is the opinion that is driving the decision making. I wouldn't even presume to comment on whether DiFino's opinion is correct, incorrect, or reasonable; but I do understand his opinion is contrary to the expert opinions from your physicians.

With respect to Dr. Tucker, I would wonder if he has unilateral decision making authority and/or if the University imposes parameters on his decisions. Just speculating here, but I wonder if when he refers out for expert opinion (as he always should, IMO) and that opinion is the athlete is at high risk (even in the face of contrary opinions), is Tucker then compelled to disqualify?

IF that is the case, Dr. Tucker is more the scapegoat and it's the process that should be scrutinized.

In any case, I sincerely feel bad for Steven and I think your frustration is justified.

 

[RoofBeam]

What I think is regrettable, stupid and cowardly is that Tucker and SU are treating Clark and his family like some snowflakes in need of a safe space, counter to their wishes, when the issue is obviously complicated and controversial enough to elicit disagreement from presumably qualified practitioners. Why not call on the opinion of additional experts rather than rely exclusively on the conclusion reached by some hematologist in podunk NY.

 

[dasher]

What I think is regrettable, stupid and cowardly is that Tucker and SU are treating Clark and his family like some snowflakes in need of a safe space, counter to their wishes, when the issue is obviously complicated and controversial enough to elicit disagreement from presumably qualified practitioners. Why not call on the opinion of additional experts rather than rely exclusively on the conclusion reached by some hematologist in podunk NY.

At the end of the day, someone has to make a judgment. It really is as simple as that. We don't know all of the factors that Dr Tucker took to make his judgment. It is such a disappointment for Steven and quite frankly the team. To be young and told you can't play the game you love with the friends you have made is very sad. However, the medical staff is also looking out for Steven and his best interests. It wouldn't be the dr's in Alabama that would pay the price for letting Steven play and have something horrible happen.

 

[RoofBeam]

This is a ridiculous position. If the decision is Tucker's alone he is being unreasonable and presumptuous because he is not clinically qualified to have a definitive opinion about a matter controversial enough to have specialists disagree. If he is basing his decision exclusively on some hematologist's interpretation who is from podunk NY and without any national stature when he could be collecting additional hematological consults from Boston or NY or TX or wherever in order to make a truly informed decision then he is simply a fool and, I might suggest, given what is at stake for the young man and his family, a tool. ...Football is inevitably attended by some degree of danger. Given the likelihood of a recurrence of clotting as outlined in the stats presented by bcubs, Tucker's line of "reasoning," such as it exists, suggests that no one should be playing football.

At the end of the day, someone has to make a judgment. It really is as simple as that. We don't know all of the factors that Dr Tucker took to make his judgment. It is such a disappointment for Steven and quite frankly the team. to be young and told you can't play the game you love with the friends you have made is very sad. However, the medical staff is also looking out for Steven and his best interests. It wouldn't be the dr's in Alabama that would pay the price for letting Steven play and have something horrible happen.

 

[orangefog]

Santo DiFino. He's not a vascular surgeon; he's a hematologist.

I don't see why his orientation has anything to do with this.

 

[AAM62]

I don't see why his orientation has anything to do with this.

rimshot!

 

[dasher]

This is a ridiculous position. If the decision is Tucker's alone he is being unreasonable and presumptuous because he is not clinically qualified to have a definitive opinion about a matter controversial enough to have specialists disagree. If he is basing his decision exclusively on some hematologist's interpretation who is from podunk NY and without any national stature when he could be collecting additional hematological consults from Boston or NY or TX or wherever in order to make a truly informed decision then he is simply a fool and, I might suggest, given what is at stake for the young man and his family, a tool. ...Football is inevitably attended by some degree of danger. Given the likelihood of a recurrence of clotting as outlined in the stats presented by bcubs, Tucker's line of "reasoning," such as it exists, suggests that no one should be playing football.

I see. These dr's are fools.

 

[bcubs9497]

What I think is regrettable, stupid and cowardly is that Tucker and SU are treating Clark and his family like some snowflakes in need of a safe space, counter to their wishes, when the issue is obviously complicated and controversial enough to elicit disagreement from presumably qualified practitioners. Why not call on the opinion of additional experts rather than rely exclusively on the conclusion reached by some hematologist in podunk NY.

We proposed another consult and were denied.

 

[Cuse'91]

I see. These dr's are fools.

Quite the opposite; they collect consultation fees from SU, and just disqualify everybody to not risk any liability. Easy peasy...

 

[OburgOrange]

bcubs9497 . How did Stevens meeting with HC Babers go?

 

[bcubs9497]

. How did Stevens meeting with HC Babers go?

It went okay. Did nothing to change the situation, though.

 

[OburgOrange]

It went okay. Did nothing to change the situation, though.

 

[Orangepace]

I see. These dr's are fools.

I think the problem everyone is frustrated with is the fact that there are two separate hematologists with conflicting conclusions, yet the authority on the matter made a finite conclusion regardless. Even more frustrating is the fact that he wouldn't let the family work with the school and identify a few additional opinions. Dr's are human and as such have "off" days as well. Hell, in this situation that the Clark's find themselves in, one of these Dr's would be wrong. That doesn't mean the Dr. is unqualified.

In my opinion, Tucker bungled this situation. He came to a definitive answer in less than 24 hrs after the specialist they referred Steven, issued a conflicting opinion to that of the Clark's preferred specialist. Any prudent person, Dr. or not, would:

1. Explain the situation to the Clark's.
2. Confirm they understand that the Clark's preferred physicians came to an alternate conclusion.
3. Explain that due to the result of the school designated specialist, chances of Steven resuming his football activities at Syracuse is significantly in doubt.
4. Suggest that they, together (the Clark's and the University) identify and seek additional counsel from a separate specialist.
5. Explain that if the conclusions of this 2nd school commissioned specialist is the same as the first, their hands are tied.

Seems too logical I guess.

 

[OrangeMojo]

At the end of the day, someone has to make a judgment. It really is as simple as that. We don't know all of the factors that Dr Tucker took to make his judgment. It is such a disappointment for Steven and quite frankly the team. To be young and told you can't play the game you love with the friends you have made is very sad. However, the medical staff is also looking out for Steven and his best interests. It wouldn't be the dr's in Alabama that would pay the price for letting Steven play and have something horrible happen.

Contradicting yourself - the doctors are looking out for Steven and his best interests - then go right back to the focus on liability in your very next sentence. These two SU docs were going to DQ Steven from the moment they found this genetic identifier due to liability concerns and not medical risk. If that wasn't the case they'd be open to bringing in additional specialists and not just JBs golf buddy and ready for retirement GP to rule on a relatively complex situation.

 

[bigmike]

Contradicting yourself - the doctors are looking out for Steven and his best interests - then go right back to the focus on liability in your very next sentence. These two SU docs were going to DQ Steven from the moment they found this genetic identifier due to liability concerns and not medical risk. If that wasn't the case they'd be open to bringing in additional specialists and not just JBs golf buddy and ready for retirement GP to rule on a relatively complex situation.

Regrettably, I think you captured exactly what happened with your sentence beginning "These two SU docs..

 

[chakka3421]

I think the problem everyone is frustrated with is the fact that there are two separate hematologists with conflicting conclusions, yet the authority on the matter made a finite conclusion regardless. Even more frustrating is the fact that he wouldn't let the family work with the school and identify a few additional opinions. Dr's are human and as such have "off" days as well. Hell, in this situation that the Clark's find themselves in, one of these Dr's would be wrong. That doesn't mean the Dr. is unqualified.

In my opinion, Tucker bungled this situation. He came to a definitive answer in less than 24 hrs after the specialist they referred Steven, issued a conflicting opinion to that of the Clark's preferred specialist. Any prudent person, Dr. or not, would:

1. Explain the situation to the Clark's.
2. Confirm they understand that the Clark's preferred physicians came to an alternate conclusion.
3. Explain that due to the result of the school designated specialist, chances of Steven resuming his football activities at Syracuse is significantly in doubt.
4. Suggest that they, together (the Clark's and the University) identify and seek additional counsel from a separate specialist.
5. Explain that if the conclusions of this 2nd school commissioned specialist is the same as the first, their hands are tied.

Seems too logical I guess.

You are on track more than you know. Tucker is at best an amateur - there are so many process things he did and has done wrong in the past it's incredulous. SU is insane for keeping him employed.

I'm also getting annoyed with Wildhack. Our AD should be benchmarking with at least all other ACC schools on medical protocol and process simply just to keep us on the same level as who we are expected to compete against.

Finally, don't misunderstand what I have been saying. With proper protocol, procedures and professionals in place - if the same conclusion was reached about Steven C and he was DQ'd for the kids safety, then I would be supportive of the decision. I cannot support at all who and what they currently have in place.

The lack of what to do from a benchmarking perspective makes me start to question the competence of our new AD. I do know our previous short term AD he started the process to remove Tucker as he knew what we had in place, based upon his previous experience, was quote "amateur at best" (that's why I keep repeating myself because it's not my words). Wildhack lacks the experience and understanding of how or what to do (or so it seems) so nothing changes. Nuff said.