Ryne's Law: The ConTACT Act

Who will pay for the high school's medical malpractice insurance?

What a touching tribute video.I hope this act brings comfort to Ryne's family and friends.

Schools require any student participating in athletics to undergo a physical, either with their own doctor or with the school's contracted physician. This appears to be one more facet to an already existing requirement, and it would not seem to neccesitate any insurance beyond what is already there.

"this will help schools invest in concussion screening technology "

presumably, after investment in this screening technology would come use of this screening technology?

And, presumably, some interpretation of the results of the screening technology will need to take place?

The untimely death of Ryne Dougherty is a deeply saddening and tragic loss. My heart goes out to his family, teamates and peers at MHS. That being said, is it really neccessary for MORE legislation? It was an isolated and unfortunate incident. We don't need more legislation, more laws and more insurance. Is this new process really going to save teenage lives? Or does it seem like congresssman Bill Pascrell wants to seem like a hero for turning this tragedy into a law.

The untimely death of Ryne Dougherty is a deeply saddening and tragic loss. My heart goes out to his family, teamates and peers at MHS. That being said, is it really neccessary for MORE legislation? It was an isolated and unfortunate incident. We don't need more legislation, more laws and more insurance. Is this new process really going to save teenage lives? Or does it seem like congresssman Bill Pascrell wants to seem like a hero for turning this tragedy into a law.

It would seem to me that any results from such a screening that raised concerns could be handled simply by stating that the student could not take part in athletics until his or her physician viewed the results and gave an OK. The school would not be providing a diagnosis, but rather passing information on to a physician.

While I think that Ryne's death was absolutely tragic, I do not understand why we would now pass this Act. Unforunately, in sports, injuries, and even deaths occur. Again, tragic- yes. Totally. But to invest these funds is an overreaction in my opinion.
A friend's child died in a soccer game- it turned out that part of his skull was too thin. Should the state of NC now pass legislation that all children must have x-rays to determine the thickness of their skulls and submit to the school prior to playing? No- that too would be an overreaction to an accident. Albeit a tragic one.

Yes, ROC. And they will come to you door to ask you directly to pay for this service. Isn't possible that sometimes a new policy or new equipment may not cost you a dime, or even if it does it may be worthwhile cost? For someone with multiple Hummers you really are a cheap SOB. I suspect the school doctors already in place will be able to read the test results.

Schools have on staff doctors now? Jersey, what world do you live in?

multiple Hummers? Shhh..this is a family web site.

Still an awful story.

But isn't there an issue here of Ryan and friends knowing he still had concussion issues, yet did not tell?

Or was that a rumor?

If so, no legislation can prevent folks from hiding.

"It would seem to me that any results from such a screening that raised concerns could be handled simply by stating that the student could not take part in athletics until his or her physician viewed the results and gave an OK."

Yes, that's not the scenario that is likely to result in a lawsuit cro.

It is the screening result that does not "raise concerns" and the subsequent death or injury of a "cleared to play" student.

As tragic as this incident is, this law seems a bit excessive. If someone, drops dead in my office today from a heart attack, does that mean every employee should undergo cardiac testing? And isn't it more the responsibility of the parents, rather than the schools, to ensure that children receive the proper medical care?

ROC, the scenario you suggest does not differ from the current situation. As it is today, if a student suffers a heart attack or some event like that while playing, and that student has been cleared to play following the required physical, the school is in the clear. Of course people can always sue, and this being NJ many probably will. But the school's responsibility is to require the clearance, make sure that all participants are cleared, and maintain a record of that clearance.
I don't see this screening as being in any way more fraught with lawsuit potential than the tests currently required for athletes.

He knew he had a concussion and hid it. Kids do not always have sound judgement. So if there's a simple way to screen after a head injury and it prevent another kids's death why not? If a kid breaks his arm and it shows up in an X-ray he gets treated and doesn't get to play until the parents can make that judgement with their doctor.

"ROC, the scenario you suggest does not differ from the current situation. As it is today, if a student suffers a heart attack or some event like that while playing, and that student has been cleared to play following the required physical, the school is in the clear."

Yes it does in one, specific and major way - the "clearing" is done by a doctor in his/her office and not school personnel, with school owned screening equipment.

And the doctor is smart enough to carry malpractice insurance.

No, the scenario does not differ. Likely more than half of the students who participate in athletics get their physicals from the school's physician -- a doctor who is contracted to the district and who conducts those physicals at the school. Naturally, he or she has insurance, as does the district to cover this. It is no different than a school doctor OKing a student and then having that student suffer a heart attack -- something which happens dozens of times each year in this country. In those cases, the school has had no liability because the screening was conducted and the kid was OKed by a PHYSICIAN, not "the school".

Easy answer, get the obsessed baboons that think the only way to teach self-reliance and working as a team is violent sports. There is more money wasted, more locally infringed space (new lighting and longer hours on school fields) to local homeowners and more permanent injuries (bet you know at least one guy with knee problems that resulted in surgery later from school football), for what?
I really saw the light when an acquaintance started lamenting about all the time and expense the extra clubs and camps and workouts were costing him, yet it was worth it; his son was working toward #1 and had 6 pak abs. Just think how good that kid will be when he turns NINE! No joke.
Let's get the priorities straight, not get rid of school sports, just bring them back to fun games and put the money into the library and teachers.

If the taxpayers are subsidizing medical physicals that's a practice which should stop - we should only require that they be done, not provide for them. But that's another topic.

But even aside from the doctor, the ownership of the equipment itself opens up liability doors. The equipment must be maintained, it's software updated, etc.

If a doctor and no cost to the school, came to do physicals and brought his own screening equipment i'd have no problem with that at all.

I think the focus should be on how to make school sports safer for all. Yes, athletic people are prone to knee and other ailments later in life but you know what? So are couch potatoes.

That being said, I think that all kids who wish to participate in sports should be screened but by THEIR OWN PEDIATRICIANS, not by the school. Said pediatrician can then sign a form attesting that said kid is in good physical shape to engage in sports. I remember when I went away to camp as a kid, the camp required that each kid do that.

I think legislation IS necessary.

There is a player on my son's team who suffered a concussion 2 weeks ago, sat out last week and is coming back this week to play. I've reminded my son about Tyne and he said the player is fine, cleared by his doctor. But like Tyne, many kids that age don't come clean with their doctor about how they are feeling because they are blinded by their passion to play.

I'd love to see a mandatory sit-out period for any student athlete who suffers from a concussion.

Schools have been conducting sports physicals in this state, in this country, for decades. If you feel that this is apractice that should stop well, talk to your representative. In the meantime, it is established practice.
Doctors do not bring their own equipment other than a stethoscope, perhaps. These physicals do not involve MRIs or what might be called elaborate testing. The screening machines for this proposed test would not expose the school to liability any more than the use of the school's blood pressure monitor would open the school up to lawsuits should a kid drop from hypertension.
Whether this test is a good idea or not can be argued, but to object to it on the basis of increased liability is not valid, in my view.

a mandatory sit-out period would likely cause more kids not to "come clean" with their doctors.

"The screening machines for this proposed test would not expose the school to liability any more than the use of the school's blood pressure monitor would open the school up to lawsuits should a kid drop from hypertension."

The blood pressure monitor does and should open up the school to liability if it is not properly maintained and leads to injury.

Now, I'm going to make a wild guess that a brain injury screening device is more likely than not to be somewhat more complex than a graduated tube filled with mercury.

Which coincidentally, I imaging the relative complexity and cost of such a device is why federal legislation and funding are "necessary" in the first place.

Let's not turn schools into medical facilities. Mandate all the certifications and test you want, but ALL the liability for such screening should fall on the provider of the testing which should not be the school.

Not sure where y'all live, but in my experience kids participating in sports must bring in a form signed by their own doctors clearing them to play. Montclair h.s. has a nurse on staff whose job seems to be to pester kids and parents to turn in their forms on time.

A mandatory sit-out period is just plain silly.

There is nothing abnormal or wrong with competition, I would believe it to be human nature.
Who doesn't try their best to win. It's the escalating level of high school sports from kids playing a game to having the commitment and support of tthe business of professional sports.
Extreme in the comparison? Ever hear of a high school student told to drop other after school activities to "focus" on football? Ever hear the astronomy club telling this to its members.
The problem is having to win rather than playing a game that it's fun to win.
As someone who participated, I gave it up after witnessing some tragic dressing downs of some who failed on the field; if they happened today instead of the 70's there could be physical abuse charges. The message given? Win at all costs, reschedule your math tutoring rather than miss 1 practice a week.
Change the focus at least in high school and you won't have to worry about people playing with a concussion because they think they have too.

wally, Montclair has offered sports physicals forever. Many students use their own physicians, but a great many do not. After all, its "free" to get it at school.
While the testing machinery is no doubt more difficult to maintain, the point is whether the school can be held responsible for an injury to a student who was cleared to play by either a "school doctor" or his/her own physician. And case law suggests the answer is no.
The blood pressure tube does not "lead to injury". It is maintained as a matter of course, and law, in accordance with standards already established by the state. If it has been found to be up to standard, then there is no liability.
Now, you can call mikey and get an expert opinion, if you'd like.

That's not my experience, Pokey. Some coaches are jerks with no sense of perspective, but many aren't. It's silly to damn a whole sport because some people take it too seriously.

Although it's violent, it's also fun as hell to play and watch. Studies have shown that 100 percent of the people who would want to see football abolished have never played it.

Interesting, cro. I wasn't aware the school actually provided physicals. Anyway, I would think the doctor's insurance would cover it.

Only "sports physicals", wally. Immunizations, etc. aren't done there. So the pestering nurse is probably hunting down kids who are missing required documentation for shots.

if the injury results from the doctor's misuse or misinterpretation, then he's on the hook. If its a result of an improperly maintained machine, the "maintainer" of the machine would be on the hook.

At any rate, being the hopeless cynic that I am, who would like to bet that there is such a machine coincidentally made at great expense right here in Mr. Pascrell's district?

They wouldn't HAVE to come clean. If they suffer a concussion (pretty obvious when it cccurs, kid can't usually hide symptoms since they are almost always tended to by team trainer) that has been documented by coach/trainer, there is a mandatory sit-out period.

The initial concussion isn't easy to hide but the length of the after effects are.

Well, as luck would have it, I just returned from Washington with a patent on just such a device.

Talk about timing!

well you're still funny cro. despite being 106% wrong on every single other thing under the sun.

Wrong wally, never said abolish, still play touch games with friends among other sports (do my best to win at scrabble too). Change the seriousness, the sport is fun.
Any coach that's not up on winning 1st is replaced; it would be fine to get the best out of someone that you can, to inspire sometimes. The best I can say is the perspective is wrong, but this is an age old disagreement.
Having to win or else is too often the focus.
That said, there will always be individuals that want to focus obsessively on sports, go for it. Just don't make them coach or let them control the unwritten policy.

Why, that's exactly how I feel about you, ROC!
Yet its a good balance ---
sort of like ebony and ivory!

At the end of the day, freak sports accidents will kill young people. Apparently these are not serving as a warning to others.
Que Darwin.

As someone who had a properly diagnosed concussion in life (from a fight, football even on the college level proved relatively safe for me, certainly safer than Catholic schooling with nuns and brothers) I honestly don't think Ryne Dougherty "knew" he'd had a concussion and thusly "hid it," jerseygurl. It doesn't really work that way on any athletic level below the sort of severe head injuries one gets from playing in the NFL.

But the legislation urged by Pascrell, which entails, I believe, at least $5 million in grants, is merely grandstanding by this tired old hack. It makes him look good locally even as it probably smells totally of pork to his Congressional colleagues.

I agree with cathar's second comment completely. My personal experience has been different as far as high school athletes hiding injuries not to be sidelined. Concussions, I don't know, like anything there is a certain amount of difference to how an injury and pain are felt by an individual. Some get away with it some are regretful. I think it just keeps getting more competitive and should be brought down a few levels.

The "symptoms" of a concussion may seem vague at best to a high school athlete, Pokey. They may not recognize a good hit to the skull as the trouble it can later prove to be. That was basically my point. Too much is assumed on the behalf of the very unfortunate Ryne Dougherty.

That, and perhaps that I also played even college ball (and it really wasn't ALL that long ago) when badly informed coaches saw the solution to virtually any malady as a nice lap or walk once round the track.

But I also differ entirely with you on the importance, usefulness and sheer fun of football. Even though my own primal fear until I was drafted was probably of being hit in the head by a baseball.

I don't know. I had a minor concussion as an adult and there was NO mistaking the symptoms.

It wasn't so much pain after the first 48 hours but the other feelings such as fuzziness, inability to concentrate, and just this overwhelming feeling of not being 'right'. Even a teenager, who we all kno2 might have similar feelings regularly just as part of the hormonally charged teen years, would recognize what I felt as wrong.

Hiding, you are right. In the first post about his death, he had been telling his friends he had those symptoms but did not want his parents to know because he wanted to stay in the game.

Ryne's friends said after his death that he had complained to them about symptoms. Either he didn't know enough to communicate them to the doctors and coaches or, more likley, he hid them. We'll probably never know. In my experience, though, there was a powerful tendency among the football tribe to play no matter what. Hiding injuries and playing with them was seen as evidence of desire, toughness, etc.

I've had several concussions with two of them severe.

The severe concussions rendered me unable to communicate for a time - I lost the ability to speak coherently - and it was several days before I felt normal.

The moderate concussions produced nausea, disorientation, headaches and a feeling of malaise which lasted for a day or two.

A real concussion is unmistakeable.