National Collegiate Athletic Association |
CommentAugust 18, 1997
Guest editorial -- Effective emergency care takes team efforts
Terry O'Brien Emergency medical care is a cornerstone of any athletics program. It is the crucial arena where administrators, coaches, certified athletic trainers and other athletics personnel work together for the good of the student-athlete. The athletics director, as the head of the athletics program, leads such efforts. In 1994, the NCAA Presidents Commission's Special Committee on Student-Athlete Welfare, Access and Equity charged the NCAA Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports with development of a comprehensive plan to heighten awareness of health and safety issues throughout the Association. Released in 1996, the resulting plan included revisions of guidelines for emergency medical coverage at practices and games, as well as out-of-season practices and skill sessions. These guideline revisions will be included in the 1997-98 NCAA Sports Medicine Handbook, scheduled for distribution in early September. The handbook is distributed to athletics directors, senior woman administrators, certified athletic trainers, head team physicians and student-athlete advisory committees at member institutions. In an effort to increase awareness of these guidelines, the competitive-safeguards committee has worked with various groups to incorporate the guidelines into institutional certification and self-study documents. The second round of Division I institutional certification and self study includes a component that evaluates a school's medical coverage and emergency plan. Such a component already is part of the Division II Institutional Self-Study Guide (ISSG) and is being considered for the next edition of the Division III ISSG. These efforts are consistent with the NCAA's constitutional assertion that each member institution has a responsibility to protect the health of student-athletes and to provide a safe environment for them. Many schools already may comply with the guidelines and may simply need to document their practices and review their implementation. Other institutions may need a bit more fine tuning. One thing is required across the board: the commitment of the athletics director and administration at each institution. Implementing these guidelines is a key part of maintaining a clear, organized medical plan for athletics departments, and it falls to the athletics director to lead the implementation efforts. While team physicians and certified athletic trainers are responsible for all aspects of medical care, athletics directors are responsible for providing a safe overall environment for student-athletes. To secure the safety of the student-athlete and to minimize liability issues, the two groups must work together: the physicians and certified athletic trainers assisting in plan development, and the athletics directors allocating the resources to implement it. During the past two decades, however, NCAA member institutions have experienced an increase in the number of sports offered as well as a dramatic increase in the length of playing and practice seasons.
Additionally, nontraditional seasons, The result? A genuine concern that appropriate medical support -- especially emergency care -- has not kept pace with the increased activity. Certified athletic trainers have noted recurring incidents that suggest a lack of adherence to the NCAA Sports Medicine Handbook guidelines, including emergency care. This places the student-athlete, the athletics department and the member institutions in a less-than-ideal risk position. In 1993, the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled colleges owe a "duty of care" to recruited student- athletes regarding reasonable foreseeable emergencies that may occur during a school-sponsored sports event. The implications of this ruling are far-reaching; however, the revised guidelines -- particularly those specific to emergency care -- minimize the risk to an institution by preparing for just such a duty of care for all student-athletes. Look in your new NCAA Sports Medicine Handbook. Read the guidelines, and then read them again. If you are an athletics director, make plans to implement the guidelines. If you are a coach, an administrator, a certified athletic trainer, a team physician or other member of the athletics staff, discuss the new guidelines with your athletics director. Together, create a plan to implement the guidelines efficiently. Terry O'Brien is a certified athletic trainer and is chair of the National Athletic Trainers' Association College/University Athletic Trainers' Committee. He also is head athletic trainer at Towson State University. Letters to the Editor -- Burden, benefits should be shared by allTwenty-five years after its passage, Title IX, much like affirmative action, still remains a source of controversy. The two topics are very similar. I read with great interest the letter (June 30) from coach John O. Herbold II, who laments the fact that if he were a student today, he probably would be cut, and his troubling questions, "...didn't I have the right to make the team? Who knows what value I may...have brought to my alma mater?" These questions should give him insight into why Title IX (and affirmative action) is so important. There are two important questions addressed here. One is the notion that he had a "right." A right gives one entitlement. I would hesitate to say he had a right to make the team; what he did have was a right to an opportunity to make the team. But no such rights to opportunities were available for any women. His opportunities were allowed him at the expense of others who were denied any access to participation. Coach Herbold is in no way to blame for this situation. Yet he must realize that his access was based on an unjust distribution of benefits in our society. He does, of course, mention that women were given "a bad deal," but he goes on to claim that "like everything else in this country, the pendulum has swung too far." Perhaps if he were in "women's shoes," he would see it differently. No question that we have seen great strides, but while women are just now beginning to benefit from a more equitable access to the benefits of sports, equitable access has yet to be reached. In any society, as well as its institutions, there are benefits and burdens. No society is rich enough so that all members have only benefits. We as partners must share in the benefits as well as the burdens. What has happened with the passage of civil rights legislation is that those previously denied are being given access to the benefits, with predictable results. Those who have been in a privileged position and have developed expectations as a result of this privileged position are unhappy because their expectations may not be met as easily as before. The problem is that with the removal of barriers, the field of competition for scarce resources becomes exacerbated. Traditionally a certain group has benefited from a preferential system based on the systematic exclusion of another group. The elimination of these traditional patterns of discrimination no doubt adversely affects the expectations of the privileged group since it compels competition for the scarce resources where none previously existed. The privileged group's expectations have become the norm, and thus a sense of entitlement and their "right"; any alteration of the norm is considered "reverse discrimination." But the expectations of some will not be met. First, their hopes arose from an illegal system; second, if relief under the Civil Rights Act can be denied because the group who has not suffered discrimination will be unhappy about it, there will be little hope of correcting the wrongs to which the act is directed. Many women, myself included, would have liked to have had the opportunities to participate that coach Herbold assumed were his by right. But no such opportunities existed, and who knows what honor and value we may have brought to our respective alma maters! Now the dilemma is how do we redress past wrongs yet recognize that discrimination is generally wrong, especially given scarce resources. As President V. Lane Rawlins put it in his guest editorial (July 7), it is important not to make Title IX a zero-sum game. Unfortunately, that is how it is presently viewed. But first, it must be remembered that athletics programs are part of universities and as such, they must fit with the educational missions of these universities and their constituents. Secondly, if we recognize that the promotion of all members of society, not just one group, benefits us all, we may see past the zero-sum game. Of course, this does not mean that everyone gets what they want. And finally, it may be that if schools examine the excesses and waste of some programs, there may be enough to fund some new women's programs without eliminating some men's programs. I am very confident that this has already taken place, but the issue then is, what is considered "excess"? No privileged program wants to give up its favored status, for its expectations have become the norm, and thus the feeling of entitlement, and so on. No society is rich enough that everyone can have what they want. Thus, to redress past wrongs, policies must be adopted. No policy provides a perfect solution, as changes do not come easy nor without costs. The result that some people are unhappy is a natural response and an inevitable outcome of any policy. But in the attempt to minimize the costs, we must all realize that as partners in a larger unit with shared ends and ideals, good will by all is necessary.
Jan Boxill
Money source?I really enjoyed V. Lane Rawlins' article on Title IX. I don't think there is a male coach out there who doesn't think athletics is just as important for women as it is for men. However, the problem is that most athletics funding comes from what revenue sports (such as football and men's basketball) raise and from contributions of alumni who have played a sport in college and see its value and therefore give money to support the program today. I know that I have been at the University of California, Irvine, coaching water polo for 31 years, and I am just now beginning to have alumni with enough money to give some back to the program. Women's sports may make some money in the future, but right now they are not bringing in large sums of dollars, and they do not have old wealthy grads who are out there willing to give them money. Maybe the state can force football and men's basketball to give up half of what they make to support women's athletics, but I can't see how the federal or state courts can force alumni to donate money to women's programs. Where is that power located in our national or state constitutions? The last I heard, we are still a democracy with a Constitution. It has taken 31 years to get alumni support for men's water polo at UC Irvine, and the polo programs that have good support have been in operation for 40 to 50 years. Women can keep demanding, but I just want a logical answer to one question: Where is the money going to come from to support women's sports? I don't believe any football program earns 100 percent over what it costs to run the program, and I think that is what some women want.
Edward H. Newland Opinions -- Institutional shoe-company contracts: Boon or bane?
William Friday, president emeritus "I realize that money is the pressure in intercollegiate sports. But the time has come when we should decide who is going to control college sports -- whether it is the television networks, the shoe companies or the universities themselves. Currently, it looks like the universities are losing out. "I oppose giving up institutional authority, autonomy and control for money. Shoe contracts are one more example of that, regardless of whether they are negotiated by the university or by individual coaches. Carolina and other ACC schools have not avoided the dilemma."
Michael Hooker, chancellor "I have misgivings about the propriety of a university being in the entertainment business. But that's what college athletics have become, and it's too late to turn back. The (Nike) contract falls within the context of the operation of a modern athletics department.... It's my job to hold the university to the highest standards of integrity with no compromise of its values. And it's not clear to me how these companies could possibly gain any measure of institutional control. "Some people fear the darkness. There is a certain witch-hunt mentality within the media. But is this a rational fear? What is its basis? I've taught ethics in the past, and I just don't see a problem in this matter. There are going to be logos on uniforms regardless. Why is there anything wrong with accepting money to wear them?"
Dick Tharp, director of athletics "You don't sell your integrity or the university's in making a deal. If you do, you've lost everything you've spent 100 years building up. That's the issue. Can you, in fact, balance the opportunity of gaining a sponsorship and taking advantage of the dollars involved without selling the soul of the institution?"
|