Parents go to war over American football concussion
A father’s attempt to stop his son playing at high school threatens NFL from the bottom up, writes Daniel Schofield
A tackling ban for under-14s would only transfer the risk from one age profile to another
It has always been assumed that the greatest threat that concussion posed to the NFL would be a tsunami of lawsuits from former players. As of last year, the NFL was still dragging its feet over paying out a $1billion-plus (£720million) settlement from 664 claims, a comparative drop in the ocean for a league that generated an estimated $14billion in 2017.
Instead, the greatest danger lies not from the top down, but from the bottom up. An article in The New York Times details another legal battle, this time in a family court in Pittsburgh. John Orsini lodged a petition to stop his youngest son, 17, who has a history of concussions, playing American football at high school.
The petition was upheld until his former wife launched a countersuit, arguing that her son should be allowed to continue playing the sport he loves.
The case seems set to go to trial. The Orsinis’ son has suffered three concussions, two in American football games. Mr Orsini told The New York Times his son had headaches, was sensitive to light and noise, and was lethargic, but was still cleared to continue playing by the doctors.
“The moment for me started when he repeatedly got diagnosed with concussions and the doctors kept telling me there was no reason for him to not keep going,” Orsini, a former plaintiff ’s attorney, said.
“His mother didn’t question the doctors, but in my profession [as an ex-lawyer] it is an impossibility. If I can’t stop him now, he’s on track to have a lot more damage done.”
Although it is rare for details of a family court case to be publicised, law firms are reporting an increase in the number of legal battles over whether a child should be allowed to play American football.
The NFL has acknowledged a link between American football and chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), a degenerative brain condition. Last July, CTE was found in 99 per cent of deceased American football players who had donated their brains to Boston University’s CTE Centre.
Even if the science behind the link is still emerging, the fears are real, and as the Orsini case has shown, they have spread into the youth leagues. Since the turn of the year, California, New York, Illinois and Maryland have introduced legislation that would ban tackling in American football for children under 14.
Kevin Mccarty, an assemblyman who co-introduced the bill in California, said in a statement: “The Super Bowl may be over, but the risk of brain injury to kids who play tackle football remains.
“We have an obligation to protect children from dangerous, long-term injuries resulting from tackle football, especially brain trauma.”
There is a similar campaign to ban tackling for children under a certain age in rugby union in the United Kingdom. The danger is all too real, as the death of 14-year-old schoolboy Ben Robinson in 2011 demonstrates, but banning tackling for 14-year-olds would merely lead to poorer long-term techniques and thus transfer the risk from one age profile to another.
There is no guarantee these US bills will pass, and they have sparked much opposition, but they are indicative of the way the wind is blowing.
Participation levels across all sports in the US are declining and if parents’ fears continue to grow, then the NFL could lose a large proportion of the fodder it needs to maintain its relentless churn – and therein lies the existential threat to sport’s future.