Concussion Rule in Ohio

[scrounge]

Originally Posted by Adam

This opens us up to litigation, IMO. If any of us are slow to pull the trigger, we'll be criticized and maybe sued. If we're quick to pull the trigger, we'll be criticized and maybe even sued.

I don't really think this is an issue, at least in Ohio. No one's asking officials to diagnose anything - all the law says is that if you see signs or symptoms that *may* be consistent with a concussion, hold them out and have them see a qualified medical professional who can clear them. Not same day, admittedly, but it can be as soon as the next day. And the law explicitly offers immunity from liability unless there is willful or wanton misconduct. Doesn't mean you won't get sued but it's a pretty high barrier to beat for judgment.

[CT1]

In our state, we are to remove the player & tell the head coach that we observed signs of possible concussion. After that, it's completely out of our hands.

[parepat]

Of all the following people: parent, doctor, trainer or coach, the official is the least appropriate to decide whether a player can play due to head injury. This might be the single most ridiculous piece of legislation I have ever read. If I am wise enough to overrule a brain surgeon, why am I only making sixty bucks a game?

[JRutledge]

All our state does is ask us to remove players from the game if they have concussion like symptoms. After that, a Medial Health Care Professional makes an evaluation. And those have to be designated by schools by law. And if they feel they do not have issues, they can allow them back in the game. We basically stay out of it other then report the incidents that take place to the State and the schools have to deal with the fall out. BTW, this is also a state law that the IHSA helped come up with so the schools take on the responsiblity legally more then we do.

It must be noted that many concussion symptoms are also symptoms of other things as well. I think Ohio is going to have a lot of kids taken out of games for other symptoms that clearly could be other things if this is on the officials to decide who comes out of the game.

Peace

[maven]

Originally Posted by parepat

Of all the following people: parent, doctor, trainer or coach, the official is the least appropriate to decide whether a player can play due to head injury.

Least appropriate in what respect? All the other people you mention are partial and have a rooting interest in keeping a potentially injured player in the game. The only impartial people on the field are the officials, and the law requires them to err on the side of safety.

That said, I don't like its implementation either. I don't want to defend a bad law, but the problem with it is not its rationale.

As for lawsuits, meh. Ohio's law doesn't increase our risk exposure significantly. When a player gets injured and the parents decide to sue, the lawyers will name every adult within reach: coaches, school administrators, the school board, the state athletic association, the officials on the field, and anyone else they can think of. You throw that stuff at everyone and see where it might stick.

[parepat]

Originally Posted by maven

Least appropriate in what respect? All the other people you mention are partial and have a rooting interest in keeping a potentially injured player in the game. The only impartial people on the field are the officials, and the law requires them to err on the side of safety.

That said, I don't like its implementation either. I don't want to defend a bad law, but the problem with it is not its rationale.

As for lawsuits, meh. Ohio's law doesn't increase our risk exposure significantly. When a player gets injured and the parents decide to sue, the lawyers will name every adult within reach: coaches, school administrators, the school board, the state athletic association, the officials on the field, and anyone else they can think of. You throw that stuff at everyone and see where it might stick.

Least appropriate in that we do not know the kid, so we don't have a baseline of knowledge on what "unusual" behavior is. Parents and coaches do have this knowledge. We have not received medical training similar to a trainer or doctor.

The underlying theme of this law is that we can't trust parents, coaches, trainers or doctors to protect our kids; and, therefore, we will put the duty on officials who have no expertise in either (a) the child (b) or concussion.

[maven]

Originally Posted by parepat

Least appropriate in that we do not know the kid, so we don't have a baseline of knowledge on what "unusual" behavior is. Parents and coaches do have this knowledge. We have not received medical training similar to a trainer or doctor.

The underlying theme of this law is that we can't trust parents, coaches, trainers or doctors to protect our kids; and, therefore, we will put the duty on officials who have no expertise in either (a) the child (b) or concussion.

"Unusual" behavior is not among the signs or symptoms of concussion listed in this post.

It is not about trust, it's about what happens to people with a rooting interest, who tend to see what they want to see. This is a well-known, well-documented psychological phenomenon called confirmation bias.

[parepat]

Originally Posted by maven

"Unusual" behavior is not among the signs or symptoms of concussion listed in this post.

It is not about trust, it's about what happens to people with a rooting interest, who tend to see what they want to see. This is a well-known, well-documented psychological phenomenon called confirmation bias.

The legislature passed a law that subordinates the decision of a doctor, trainer, coach or parent to that of an official who watched a video.

You infer that the cause was noble. Was there an epidemic of doctors and trainers putting clearly concussed players back in games under the NFHS rule that necessitated a change in Ohio law.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by scrounge

I don't really think this is an issue, at least in Ohio. No one's asking officials to diagnose anything - all the law says is that if you see signs or symptoms that *may* be consistent with a concussion, hold them out and have them see a qualified medical professional who can clear them. Not same day, admittedly, but it can be as soon as the next day. And the law explicitly offers immunity from liability unless there is willful or wanton misconduct. Doesn't mean you won't get sued but it's a pretty high barrier to beat for judgment.

Maybe, but in about five years, I expect there to be some lawsuits (maybe even some successful ones).

[parepat]

Originally Posted by scrounge

I don't really think this is an issue, at least in Ohio. No one's asking officials to diagnose anything - all the law says is that if you see signs or symptoms that *may* be consistent with a concussion, hold them out and have them see a qualified medical professional who can clear them. Not same day, admittedly, but it can be as soon as the next day. And the law explicitly offers immunity from liability unless there is willful or wanton misconduct. Doesn't mean you won't get sued but it's a pretty high barrier to beat for judgment.

And there is the rub. Let's take the opinion of the guy who watched a video over the guy who graduated from medical school.

[bigjohn]

I guess this is not enforced in State Finals. Mentor QB hit hard in helmet, left very groggy, returned and finished the game.

Mentor 3-2 at Moeller14 5-C. Krizancic rush for 12 yards to the MOELLER2, 1ST DOWN MENTOR (6-Sam Hubhard).
Mentor 1-G at Moeller02 5-C. Krizancic rush for 1 yard to the MOELLER1 (93-Robby Pohlman).
Mentor 2-G at Moeller01 Timeout Mentor, clock 00:52.
Mentor 2-G at Moeller01 40-Eddie Daugherty at QB for Mentor.
Mentor 2-G at Moeller01 44-Alex Mathews rush for loss of 2 yards to the MOELLER3 (11-Chalmer Frueauf;44-Kole Shade).
Mentor 3-G at Moeller03 5-C. Krizancic at QB for Mentor.
Mentor 3-G at Moeller03 5-C. Krizancic pass complete to 40-Eddie Daugherty for 3 yards to the MOELLER0, TOUCHDOWN, clock 00:44.
39-Mike Muzic kick attempt good.

[asdf]

Originally Posted by bigjohn

I guess this is not enforced in State Finals. Mentor QB hit hard in helmet, left very groggy, returned and finished the game.

Mentor 3-2 at Moeller14 5-C. Krizancic rush for 12 yards to the MOELLER2, 1ST DOWN MENTOR (6-Sam Hubhard).
Mentor 1-G at Moeller02 5-C. Krizancic rush for 1 yard to the MOELLER1 (93-Robby Pohlman).
Mentor 2-G at Moeller01 Timeout Mentor, clock 00:52.
Mentor 2-G at Moeller01 40-Eddie Daugherty at QB for Mentor.
Mentor 2-G at Moeller01 44-Alex Mathews rush for loss of 2 yards to the MOELLER3 (11-Chalmer Frueauf;44-Kole Shade).
Mentor 3-G at Moeller03 5-C. Krizancic at QB for Mentor.
Mentor 3-G at Moeller03 5-C. Krizancic pass complete to 40-Eddie Daugherty for 3 yards to the MOELLER0, TOUCHDOWN, clock 00:44.
39-Mike Muzic kick attempt good.

Yawn.....

You weren't on the field, so all you are doing is guessing..... It just might be the correct guess, but it's still a guess.

[HLin NC]

And you know he was very groggy by......a) being there talking to him?
b) Heard it from a friend who heard it from a friend?
c) Super duper Aquaman-like telepathic communication?
d) Watched it on STO and heard an announcer in the booth tell you on your telly.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by HLin NC

b) Heard it from a friend who heard it from a friend?.

My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with the girl who saw him pass out at 31 Flavors last night. I guess it's pretty serious.

[ajmc]

This same concern comes up regularly warning about all sorts of calamities, but the bottom line is that not a whole lot, if anything, has changed, other than we're asked, and therefore expected, to be more vigilant.

NFHS 3-5-10 covers our responsibilities. The key phrase is in 3-5-10-a; "An apparently injured player is discovered by a game official.......sets the tone. Recognizing we are NOT medical professionals, the bar for generating concern, is set rather low. "Apparently injured" doesn't require a lot of diagnostic expertise and seems more a "common sense" guide.

For whatever reason, if an official doesn't like the way a player acts, behaves looks or otherwise raises concern for a players physical condition, he is authorized and encouraged to remove the player from the contest for evaluation by a medical professional, who will render a diagnosis and is responsible to decide if that player is medically fit to continue participating.

If in what should be a [U]"rare" exception [/U]the player authorized to return, continues to raise an officials concern, he is authorized to require reevaluation, to the point where concern is eliminated. Could that lead to overly anxious abuse? Possibly, but extremely doubtful.

In what should be the rarest of circumstances, where for some reason an official seriously rejects the medical decision of the designated medical personnel, can the official insist on additional clarification? Being right isn't always easy, but if there is serious enough concern, being right is correct

3-5-10-b focuses on symptoms common to "Concussions" and calls for additional scrutiny by officials and enhanced reactions to have a suspected player observed quickly, and raises the requirements for the player returning. Once again, if a player is certified to return, and continues to exhibit symptoms alarming an official, he is authorized to refer the player for additional evaluation.

The bottom line, sometimes difficult to remember is that we are charged with acting responsibly about the potential health and well being of children. Even after staying in a Holiday Inn Express, we are not medical professionals and in all but the absolute rarest of circumstances, should the medical professionals responsible for the game we are officiating, somehow, be unable to relieve our medical concerns and persuade us that their expertise is superior to our concerns, we should do what's right.

At some point early in this dispute, I would suggest seeking guidance from crew members to help evaluate your concerns.