|
Post by sardines on Jun 25, 2008 11:08:04 GMT -5
So what happens we start testing athletes? If an athlete has mitral valve prolapse they can no longer play sports? That would be a shame since the majority mitral valve prolapse defects and many other heart defects are harmless. It would save lives, but it might also result in unfair discrimination. If testing is mandated, it must remain the athlete's choice whether or not to take the risk, not the school districts. Agree totally on athlete's choice - that is where it gets sticky. There has to be a process where a waiver of liability can be signed if the athlete/parents decide to continue on. There was an issue at Northwestern a few years ago where a basketball player was diagnosed wit a heart issue and they decided not to let him play - but he could keep his scholarship. He is suing. Go figure. www.law.depaul.edu/students/organizations_journals/student_orgs/lawslj/Volume%201,%20Issue%201/Rice%20Seventh%20Circuit%20Misses%20Jumper.pdf Similar deal with Eddie Curry from the Bulls. He refused that part of the physical (obviously already knew something?) so the Bulls traded him. Tough call when it's a person's livelihood.....
|
|