Darren is back!

[JER]

Here's a thought, couldn't they threaten to boot him off the Safety committees? Without consequences, none of this will change. Ever.

SCFarm


Considering one of the current Safety and Equine Welfare Committee members is Amy Tryon...

Consequences? Accountability? It's all a sick joke.

[monstrpony]

I agree the President's role is to PRESIDE, not to make rules. But I do think that if DOC feels as if there's even a snowball's chance in hell that he might get through to DC, that he should pony up and talk to him. Same with Mark Phillips. Same with anyone who DC respects and might listen to. What harm in that?

Do we know for certain that this has not/is not happening?

From what I've heard, I'm not sure there IS anyone that DC "respects and might listen to" on this issue, but I DO agree that there is good in trying. I sincerely hope it IS going on!

[HORSEBACKRIDER]

Here is an idea -- silence can be a good option! Find dignity in not getting the last word in or replying to all posts about you!

[vineyridge]

Sometimes when a President says his hands are tied, they really are tied.

DOC's hands may be tied in his official capacity because there is no current procedure in place to protect DC and his horses from himself; but, as an individual and a high level former eventer, DOC can most assuredly approach someone who has had a massive brain injury and suggest that riding in competition less than six months after the injury is asking for trouble for the rider and for the sport.

My sister had a riding concussion that was not nearly as severe as Darren's, and she was not allowed to ride, period, or even do very physically intense exercise for 12 months after the injury.

[BarbB]

I sat there and listened to DOC tell us how we had to change the culture fo eventing. By which he meant (and said) for us to speak up when someone was being stupid or dangerous - OR EVEN POTENTIALLY so.

Can someone tell me what happened in the last couple of weeks to make all that go flying out the window?


I have a hard time not being screamingly sarcastic in my response to this....but I am trying.

When an organization, say...USEA... is put under sudden, unexpected, intense scrutiny and pressure....say, the deaths of horses and riders within a timeframe that has the membership in an uproar...there is a tendency to say and do anything to alleviate the pressure.

Thus someone stands up at a meeting such as the Safety Summit and says things that he/she NEVER expected would have immediate and (again) pressure filled consequences.

In other words, they said what they thought the members wanted to hear in order to go home and shut up and NEVER NEVER thought that it would come back to bite them in the form of one of the sports elite riders.

Had this been an amatuer ULR with no history of Olympic accomplishments and no aspirations for future Olympic accomplishments....it would have been unwelcome, but within acceptable parameters to be dealt with in a way to satisfy the membership.

But it is not, it is one of their own and quite honestly I would be surprised if the top people in this sport aren't wishing this was all a bad dream that would just go away tomorrow. Because they never expected it to be one of their own.

And that is my not sarcastic but admittedly jaded view of our leadership.

[Ajierene]

Vineyridge, I see what you are saying, but as monstrpony said - it is possible he has talked to Darren and we just don't know it. We do not know everything all the upper level riders and committee members are doing.

I hope David did talk to Darren, as well as Mark, Ralph and anyone else that knows him and might be in a position to influence Darren.

[Lexi]

He's not aiming for the '08 Olympics, so what's the hurry.I'm not entirely sure that's correct.

From DC's website, his own reply to a question about plans for his horses:

Better I Do It is currently my only qualified horse for the Olympics. It is my intention to pursue that goal to its fullest.and the 2 sentences immediately prior to that said:
"Windfall will either return to eventing or make his dressage grand prix debut this spring. He is currently in training with Robert Dover."

"this spring" is already over.

what does that tell you?

the interview also starts by saying it occurred "just over 60 days" from his accident (Mar 15). that would be about May 15.

it's now July 6. and nominated entries for the OG were due June 30; he wasn't on the list. If you're not on the short list, you can't make the team.

[poltroon]

I think the question is, in his recent-TBI state, does Darren completely understand that he's working on the 2012 Olympics, and that there's nothing he can do to go to Beijing? Or maybe he's thinking he has to hurry to get back in the tack to qualify for the 2010 WEG in Lexington.

The point being that maybe he has unrealistic expectations that are causing him to rush.

[pwynnnorman]

LLDM, I said this before and I meant it: excellent ideas are put forth here--and it is a true shame when they earn little but disrespect because of the froth they are phrased in. I'm not asking anyone to "slow down, enunciate and articulate." That's not the problem. The problem is that no one is going to listen to someone who seems to dislike them intensely, no matter how good that person's ideas are. (And, oh, the irony. That was something some told ME in the not too distant past!)

Indeed, maybe those who feel strongly about these issues should figure out how to do more than harp on what others are failing to do. Some folks have bandied about the idea of breaking off from this or that and starting anew. I wonder if anyone has considered, instead, of working within the system to bring about change. I've said many times over the years that part of the problem, IMO, is who gets to sit on this or that board or committee. Some of them care, but you know what? I'll bet that some only care about what effects them and their goals. Example: Don't you wonder who decided who should sit on the Safety Committee--and why they chose who they chose??? Maybe "they" had good reasons for their choices, but, well, don't you wonder????

You, LLDM, talked about "magically get[ting] the USEF to make better policy..." How about insisting that at least some folks who represent this or that perspective get into policy-making or policy-recommending positions? Wouldn't that be a more effective way that just pointing out the weaknesses, conflicts or personal agendas of who is in place? How about proposing a change in the By-Laws themselves such that smurfs always take up a certain percentage of influential positions/roles?

This maddens me, in fact. I'll probably get into BIG trouble for saying this, but it really does bother me a lot. I got onto a committee as (as one person put it) a "reward" (for Teddy). I'm NOT proud of that in the least and, in fact, when it was phrased that way to me, I thought about turning it down. I'd rather have been asked because someone noticed I had an interest, the energy and an advanced degree related to the subject.

Heck, I know of one person on a committee who got invited because he happened to be walking down a hallway at the right moment in time. (And, boy, am I probably going to get into trouble for that.) Most folks on horse association committees are there because they know someone or because of some almost-arbitrary decision made by someone who couldn't be bothered to look around (such as into discussion groups) to see who might have something valuable to contribute.

You also said this, LLDM: "Here's a thought, couldn't they threaten to boot him off the Safety committees? Without consequences, none of this will change. Ever."

What makes you think someone HASN'T done that? I mean, really: If you could think it up, why is it so hard to believe that maybe someone else thought of that, too?

I believe at one point you (or it could have been someone else) also pointed out how, somehow, the safety issue got weirded into an LLR thing instead of a ULR thing. Well, if you sat on that committtee, what would you be doing now? I know of one "rank and file" type of person on a committee who immediately emailed someone about this thread. (But I'll bet that person emailed just stopped reading when they got to the comments critical of the leadership.) Of course, a bunch of the safety committee's membership is probably thinking Olympics now (and every single one of them has a busy business to run, too). So I'd bet you it's not exactly on the front burner for most of them any more. But that's who got appointed (and there goes that, IMO, essential problem again: maybe instead of BNRs, that committee should have been comprised of ordinary ULRs, ones with the time and objectivity to address the issues effectively).

Anyway, I got way off point. The frustrating thing about the harsh tones some adopt -- from DC to TPTB -- is the futility of it, ultimately. People will complain and insult, but when it comes to doing something about the system or process (or people) they dislike...nothing. Absolutely nothing. What's the point? Seriously and literally, what is the point (in criticizing the leadership)?

[Classic Melody]

Anyway, I got way off point. The frustrating thing about the harsh tones some adopt -- from DC to TPTB -- is the futility of it, ultimately. People will complain and insult, but when it comes to doing something about the system or process (or people) they dislike...nothing. Absolutely nothing. What's the point? Seriously and literally, what is the point (in criticizing the leadership)?

The point is that it's an American tradition to question and criticize leadership. If we were talking about the lead-up to the Iraq War, for example, and someone said "Hey, Prez Bush, I think your logic about WMD is flawed," and you said, "What is the point of criticizing leadership?" Well, we'd be in the huge mess we're in today with Iraq. Lucky for us we failed to question and criticize leadership!

Of course, this situation is small potatoes compared to wars and terrorism. But I think to say it's not ok to question the USEA is - shall I say it? - un-American. And frankly besides the point. Like everyone I just want Darren and all riders and horses to come home safely. If that means rattling the cages at USEA, so be it.

That said, I agree the tone here has become perhaps too emotional, even though many people have made excellent points. We will have to wait a few days until we know if the USEA has done anything, and we may never know or be able to credit them if they do. And that is the unglamorous trench work of leadership.

[BaroquePony]

Originally posted by pwynnnorman:

(And, oh, the irony. That was something some told ME in the not too distant past!)

Boy, am I glad to know that I am not the only one that has made a faux pas on occasion.

[BogyNme]

Thanks deltawave for clarifying. I think that makes more sense now. :yes:

Yes, I will write a note for a patient if I think it will help them to do something that I think is perfectly safe. Something like flying commercially a few weeks after heart surgery, or returning to work a little early after a heart attack. It's a judgment call, and there are definitely times when the "standard time off" recommendations are overkill and I'm happy to support superseding them. Often this kind of "clearance" is requested by another party--a scuba diving outfit, for instance, as in the above example--for THEIR own liability insurance. If I don't think someone ought to be doing something (let's use the diving example again) I simply won't write them the note. It's not like I force them to carry a note saying I don't recommend they go diving . . . not only is that futile, but it's none of my business in the end. Advice, even advice you pay for, does not have to be followed. But when you ask another "at risk" party to be involved (the scuba outfitter, etc.) then that's a different story.

What this kind of "clearance" does NOT mean is that I've given the patient any sort of promise or guarantee that nothing could possibly happen. It's a dialogue between doctor and patient, and although it's often difficult, I've refused this kind of thing many times if I thought it was medically appropriate to do so. I've also given "clearance" for people to undergo procedures that were very dangerous and even potentially fatal, if that wound up being the right choice for that person. But never, never, never in a situation where the person wasn't facing a fate worse than death if the procedure were not done. I don't think DCs situation even comes close, no matter how passionate he is about the sport and how badly he really really really really really wants to be competing again. :rolleyes:

I'd be shocked beyond belief if Darren came up with a piece of paper from a doctor stating his risk in participating in eventing is minimal and that the doctor felt there was minimal or no risk.

[Well_Worn_Bridle]

I'm on page two, and my thinking is that if it's been deemed that his is psychologically able to understand the risk he is taking in a professional's opinion, then why not let him ride? Even if he's not able? If he can reason, rationalize as an adult, it's not up to anyone but him to put his life in danger.

[poltroon]

The point is that it's an American tradition to question and criticize leadership.

I think wynn is trying to say, "What is your goal when you write?" rather than trying to suggest that everyone shut up. I think it may be good advice: that we rethink our goals when we post here, and rather than just reacting to each other like a bunch of ping pong balls :), we always ask ourselves: what is the point of this post? How does it further my goal?

[BaroquePony]

Originally posted by Well_Worn_Bridle:

If he can reason, rationalize as an adult, it's not up to anyone but him to put his life in danger.

Because eventing is getting a bad reputation from the increased number of serious injuries to horses and riders. One more, especially if it happens to DC under the circumstances, is just going to turn more people away from the sport.

[JER]

I'm on page two, and my thinking is that if it's been deemed that his is psychologically able to understand the risk he is taking in a professional's opinion, then why not let him ride? Even if he's not able? If he can reason, rationalize as an adult, it's not up to anyone but him to put his life in danger.

But is it ok for him to put the well-being of his horses in danger?

[deltawave]

Seriously and literally, what is the point (in criticizing the leadership)?

Mmmmm, because it's fundamental human nature, perhaps?

[caffeinated]

I'm on page two, and my thinking is that if it's been deemed that his is psychologically able to understand the risk he is taking in a professional's opinion, then why not let him ride?

hmm, maybe you should have read the whole thread (or at least most of it) before replying, it's pretty informative.

[Gry2Yng]

Indeed, maybe those who feel strongly about these issues should figure out how to do more than harp on what others are failing to do. Some folks have bandied about the idea of breaking off from this or that and starting anew. I wonder if anyone has considered, instead, of working within the system to bring about change. I've said many times over the years that part of the problem, IMO, is who gets to sit on this or that board or committee. Some of them care, but you know what? I'll bet that some only care about what effects them and their goals. Example: Don't you wonder who decided who should sit on the Safety Committee--and why they chose who they chose??? Maybe "they" had good reasons for their choices, but, well, don't you wonder????

This maddens me, in fact. I'll probably get into BIG trouble for saying this, but it really does bother me a lot. I got onto a committee as (as one person put it) a "reward" (for Teddy). I'm NOT proud of that in the least and, in fact, when it was phrased that way to me, I thought about turning it down. I'd rather have been asked because someone noticed I had an interest, the energy and an advanced degree related to the subject.

Heck, I know of one person on a committee who got invited because he happened to be walking down a hallway at the right moment in time. (And, boy, am I probably going to get into trouble for that.) Most folks on horse association committees are there because they know someone or because of some almost-arbitrary decision made by someone who couldn't be bothered to look around (such as into discussion groups) to see who might have something valuable to contribute.



My experience has been that if you volunteer your time the USEA will take your help on a committee. Walking down the hallway at the right moment is one way to end up on a committee. That doesn't mean that the person was not an appropriate choice for the committee. The USEA has more work than it has volunteers. IMHO, most things are done by the same group because those people are dedicated and often in a position in their lives when they can offer their time. I am not sure there is any conspiracy.

Maybe your committee position was some sort of reward, or maybe someone was just being tongue in cheek. As in "Gee, so great of you to have produced Teddy, now here's your "reward" (read, pain and suffering and endless time drain) for doing such a wonderful thing." Said with sarcasm. I have certainly been told that my "reward" for doing a good job on a hellish, thankless project is more of the same.

I wish there were a way to put "tone of voice" on a post. I am not bickering. I am simply stating that my experience has been positive and perhaps the reward comment was someone's idea of a sarcastic joke that got misinterpreted much as my comment above.

[nirvana002]

My experience has been that if you volunteer your time the USEA will take your help on a committee. Walking down the hallway at the right moment is one way to end up on a committee. That doesn't mean that the person was not an appropriate choice for the committee. The USEA has more work than it has volunteers. IMHO, most things are done by the same group because those people are dedicated and often in a position in their lives when they can offer their time. I am not sure there is any conspiracy.

Maybe your committee position was some sort of reward, or maybe someone was just being tongue in cheek. As in "Gee, so great of you to have produced Teddy, now here's your "reward" (read, pain and suffering and endless time drain) for doing such a wonderful thing." Said with sarcasm. I have certainly been told that my "reward" for doing a good job on a hellish, thankless project is more of the same.

While you all are busy bickering at eachother and beating eachother up, I put my ass on the line and sent a text to someone that may actually be able to get through to Darren, which may cause serious problems for me. This thread was about the well being of someone we all have respect for as a horseman, whether he was liked or not..now it has turned into a boxing match. I was happy to be able to help with what information I could. Now I am out of this discussion, because it is no longer about what it was intended for. I know for myself, I did everything I could to help Darren. (who, if he read this thread would be pissed off at me for sharing with everyone, but I thought it was important for our sport and the general understanding of what has happened to him) Peace Out -Jill

[vineyridge]

Many years ago, as I recall it, Pwynn and Snowbird were involved in trying to make changes to the AHSA's lack of transparency and democracy. They went so far as to create a new organization, I believe. I don't think they got very far.

With that experience of having been unhappy with the equine bureaucracy in the past and trying to change it as an outsider, it seems odd that Pwynn is now telling us all to shut up and not raise what seem to be very valid concerns about what TPTB can do to rein in riders who were seriously injured and are still apparently impaired.

[poltroon]

it seems odd that Pwynn is now telling us all to shut up and not raise what seem to be very valid concerns...

I think what Pwynn intended to say was, "think about what you are trying to accomplish before you write."

My goal isn't to embarrass or criticize, but to raise awareness of that funky post-TBI period so that we avoid more accidents, and to ensure that when my daughter is ready to event, that we still have a sport.

As an eventer, I've been taught that if I'm going to make a mistake, to make it going forward. Thing is, there are times when that's not the right choice.

[Gry2Yng]

I am SO SORRY! My comment was not intended to be a "boxing match". Just a statement that my experience has been positive when it comes to committees and maybe someone was just playing with pwyn when they said "Here's your reward."

Wow! I am sensitive to the topic as well. And have tried only to be constructive. I was actually trying to defuse, not incite. I guess I should have understood that nerves are raw and looked for other interpretations to what I typed.

[tle]

I think what Pwynn intended to say was, "think about what you are trying to accomplish before you write."

If Pwynn needs interpretation from others in order to get the point across... isn't chastizing folks who write less than thoughtful or perhaps a bit harried in light of strong emotions like the pot and kettle?

[maxxtrot]

jill- please don't leave the thread. i for one think you did something so unselfish. you put your neck and friendship with darren on the line to tell him something he does not want to hear. i also think that took a lot of guts.i applud you for what you have done. you are the type of stand up friend i hope i have if/when something like this ever happens to me. you are a true friend to darren.he might not know that or relize that right now, but he will.

[Mozart]

While you all are busy bickering at eachother and beating eachother up, I put my ass on the line and sent a text to someone that may actually be able to get through to Darren, which may cause serious problems for me. This thread was about the well being of someone we all have respect for as a horseman, whether he was liked or not..now it has turned into a boxing match. I was happy to be able to help with what information I could. Now I am out of this discussion, because it is no longer about what it was intended for. I know for myself, I did everything I could to help Darren. (who, if he read this thread would be pissed off at me for sharing with everyone, but I thought it was important for our sport and the general understanding of what has happened to him) Peace Out -Jill

Jill:
You have a backbone. Unlike the owners of these horses. Good on you.

[nature]

While you all are busy bickering at eachother and beating eachother up, I put my ass on the line and sent a text to someone that may actually be able to get through to Darren, which may cause serious problems for me. This thread was about the well being of someone we all have respect for as a horseman, whether he was liked or not..now it has turned into a boxing match. I was happy to be able to help with what information I could. Now I am out of this discussion, because it is no longer about what it was intended for. I know for myself, I did everything I could to help Darren. (who, if he read this thread would be pissed off at me for sharing with everyone, but I thought it was important for our sport and the general understanding of what has happened to him) Peace Out -Jill

As strange as this may sound.....Let us all hope that Daren has a long, healthy and wonderful life to be "pissed off" at the incredible friend that you are, who is not selfish in her motives and just wanted the best for her good friend Darren.

Live long and prosper

[pwynnnorman]

IMHO, most things are done by the same group because those people are dedicated and often in a position in their lives when they can offer their time. I am not sure there is any conspiracy.



I didn't say selections were always made this way or that way...and I sure as heck said NOTHING about "conspiracy"! My word, where the heck do you get that from??? Why, why, why do people use such distortion and exaggeration (probably for the same reason it works in politics, I guess). Anyway, committee make-ups (not just USEA, most small non-profits) are based on expedience--nothing more, nothing less. But it's MY opinion that the organization (and others like it) needs to move beyond expedience in how committees are formed, especially when critical issues need to be addressed (like safety).

Vineyridge, you mentioned what we tried in the past. Well, why do you refer to that and then turn around and act like I'm saying people shouldn't speak up? I have not said "don't criticize," I've been talking TONE. I've praised the ideas, but criticized the emotional attacks. Saying one doesn't like how it is put hardly means one doesn't want it to be expressed at all. Again, why do you choose to distort?

IMO, both the leadership AND the membership need to recognize that things are getting a whopper lot more complicated and it might be a better idea to ask for specific types of volunteers (and specific types of members should think about volunteering, instead of just complaining, too: as an issue, it cuts both ways, IMO). Indeed, this "lull" in the safety issue and even DC's role on that committee is, IMO, symptomatic of the expedient committees issue. Y'know, a lot of stuff gets decided without any research. Now, I know not everyone is into gathering information before making a decision, but in the end, most folks believe better decisions are made that way. But if everyone's too busy or too opinionated or too tunnel-visioned or too rushed or too unconcerned to get out there and find out the lay of the land beforehand, the result is often just what folks here criticize about the decisions or lack thereof.

And then add to that the fact that some will stay busy until mid-August. Just think out of the box for a moment, would you? For example, should Gina and Darren have even been on that committee? Why is Karen on so many committees? I'm just using them as an example of what I mean, OK? I have no reason to doubt their abilities to contribute valuable ideas. But think about that when you criticize, too--and maybe you'll put some thought into the (possible) roots of what you are critical of.

The problem Vikki and I discovered years ago was that nothing happens if it's just a few people making an effort. Nothing. Everyone blathers about the issues and everyone can quickly jump onto some "let's make a T-shirt" scheme, but no one is willing to get together and get into the system to bring about change.

Why leave it up to "them"? Why let "them" decide for you? At the very least, a nominating system for critical committees might be a far more effective and productive way to address (and anticipate) some of the issues we're facing. When you nominate, you inform those charged with making committee appointments of the traits, experience, expertise, energy--whatever--your nominee has. So, even if the appointers have never heard of the person, they find out there's someone out there with, oh-say engineering experience (or fundraising or cardiology or logistics or whatever) that has direct bearing on the committee's work.

And if you care and you know someone (or are someone) who can help, wouldn't that be more productive than just razzing the current order? [And, YES, I've done this--recently, in fact. Even though there wasn't any "nominating" going on. Did it work? I don't know yet, but I tried.]

[deltawave]

Well, one can actively be helping and still feel like they need to speak up and express their frustration and fear.

[poltroon]

And then add to that the fact that some will stay busy until mid-August. Just think out of the box for a moment, would you? For example, should Gina and Darren have even been on that committee? Why is Karen on so many committees? I'm just using them as an example of what I mean, OK? I have no reason to doubt their abilities to contribute valuable ideas.

As I recall from the NGB days, all of the USEF committees are required, via the bylaws and the Ted Stevens Act, to have a certain percentage of high performance active riders. And there's only so many of them to go around.

But I agree with the other points, that we could use more non-high performance, more no-name types who happen to be expert in other areas on nearly every committee. The horse world is surprisingly full of useful folk. I think, given how Portia was sucked away from us into rule book reorganization :D, that USEF may be more open to bringing in amateur riders with outside expert credentials than we've previously assumed - but they probably have to contact those committees and make themselves and their expertise and willingness known.

[europa]

I would be curious to know what boxing association regulations are in place for returning to the ring after a TBI? Not to equate riding with boxing but I would suspect that they are a sport that deals with this injury directly and know how to deal with it.

HMMMMMMMMMMMM

I want to be on the committee that strings up anyone who schools their horses with studded boots. ;)

[LexInVA]

I would be curious to know what boxing association regulations are in place for returning to the ring after a TBI? Not to equate riding with boxing but I would suspect that they are a sport that deals with this injury directly and know how to deal with it.

HMMMMMMMMMMMM

I want to be on the committee that strings up anyone who schools their horses with studded boots. ;)

Boxing has a much better relationship with the medical world than equestrian sports because it is a sport where concussions and other physical injuries frequently occur, so they naturally have a better way of doing things since boxing has been living in the shadow of the "bloodsport" stigma it acquired many decades ago. Athletes are tested before and after fights as well as frequently between fights by their own doctors for various problems. The equestrian world, to be frank, has absolutely nothing in place apart from whatever is done through national team staff for events like the Olympics or personal physicians of riders. If Darren were to be completely evaluated by an independent medical team with no ties to Darren himself, anyone on the USET/USEF boards, or the owners of his horses, I suspect he would not pass but if he did pass and were it in my hands to make the decision, I wouldn't let him ride unless I could see with my own eyes that he is able to function 100%. If he falls again, it's gonna be a shitstorm of bad PR that won't get buried in the rectal end of the newspapers like the crap that happens in the jumper world. I can guarantee you it won't be pretty though it would certainly be yet another nail in the USEF's diamond studded, oak paneled, 24K gold-accented coffin.

[CBudFrggy]

Mmmmm, because it's fundamental human nature, perhaps?

Or to use as a catalyst to bring about political change! (by those who are driven to act!)

[Debbie]

But I agree with the other points, that we could use more non-high performance, more no-name types who happen to be expert in other areas on nearly every committee. The horse world is surprisingly full of useful folk. I think, given how Portia was sucked away from us into rule book reorganization :D, that USEF may be more open to bringing in amateur riders with outside expert credentials than we've previously assumed - but they probably have to contact those committees and make themselves and their expertise and willingness known.


Amen! I run a trade association and the key point is in bold. It's a bit easier in my group because it is a smaller number of people/companies than an organization like USEA, but there is no way I can know every individual's talents and expertise areas and then go out and handpick accordingly. I do know who knows what among the 20% of the folks who are most active (our equivalent of the TPTB), but I'm always THRILLED when someone steps forward and offers to volunteer their time and expertise.

There are times though when issues/circumstances demand leadership and committees are more renown for process than leadership. The DC issue is a matter for leadership. As others have said return to play policies exist in other sports; it's not a new concept and it should be in place for our sport especially since it's not just the safety of the individual at risk, but also his/her mount, fellow competitors and spectators.

Perhaps we should start a fund to reimburse any organizer who is sanctioned for refusing entry on a safety concern. Let the organizer make their case and apply for funds to cover any USEF fines or whatever. If I were an organizer, I can think of a few local folks off the top of my head that I would shudder to see their entires on my desk. I think a landowner/organizer should have an inviolate right to refuse entry to anyone for any reason, but I'm kind of hard core that way. ;)

[Bensmom]

I would be curious to know what boxing association regulations are in place for returning to the ring after a TBI? Not to equate riding with boxing but I would suspect that they are a sport that deals with this injury directly and know how to deal with it.



Funny you should ask! This is what I do for a living :)

At least until we hire a new victim to take over the Boxing Commission that is ;)

In any event, in our state, someone with a head injury would be 1) immediately suspended on the scene (but this is the case with every TKO or KO -- even a TKO is given 30 days, a KO is automatically 60, even if it is only momentary) 2) and probably with any severity of injury, the suspension would be indefinite until the person presents evidence of normalcy to the Commission's Executive Director. This consists of clearn MRIs, or whatever the Commission deems appropriate for that type of injury.

We have no interest in anyone fighting with a head injury and facing the difficulties involved in the claim that we shouldn't have licensed such a person because we knew that they were a danger to themselves.

Now, those of you who were at the safety meeting may remember that this is why I cautioned the group against considering going to a licensure situation. There are many, many boxing cases pending at one time -- so much so that if the USEA/USEF wanted to go to such a system, I believe it would create a whole job for someone (hopefully, for me! :lol: )

Yes, there is a difference in that we are a state agency that grants these licenses, but I believe you'd have to have many of the same protections in place, as acting on someone's license would be a formal action and a protest procedure would probably need to be developed.

Whereas, I think giving the organizers the right to refuse entries and developing return to play guidelines can be done without going full bore into licensing.

Boy, that is straying a bit off topic! ;)

Hope that was helpful, though. And Lex is correct in the rest of his estimation about how boxing works with physicians -- they are checked before, after and if need be, during fights.

[pwynnnorman]

I would be curious to know what boxing association regulations are in place for returning to the ring after a TBI? Not to equate riding with boxing but I would suspect that they are a sport that deals with this injury directly and know how to deal with it.


And football? Did I miss some examples from that sport? Don't quarterbacks get their brains scrambled sometimes (or have they solved that problem with their helmet design)?

I
think, given how Portia was sucked away from us into rule book reorganization :D, that USEF may be more open to bringing in amateur riders with outside expert credentials than we've previously assumed - but they probably have to contact those committees and make themselves and their expertise and willingness known.

*******

Amen! I run a trade association and the key point is in bold. It's a bit easier in my group because it is a smaller number of people/companies than an organization like USEA, but there is no way I can know every individual's talents and expertise areas and then go out and handpick accordingly. I do know who knows what among the 20% of the folks who are most active (our equivalent of the TPTB), but I'm always THRILLED when someone steps forward and offers to volunteer their time and expertise.



Yes, yes! That is the way it IS--but it is NOT the way it has to be. This is what, for some reason--and even when they have the means to do so--non-profits do time after time: they expect everyone to volunteer, without being asked. And yet study after study after study has shown that you get a far better response rate when you ASK--and the more specifically you ask, the better your responses. Why would it be so difficult to have a regular feature--heck, a mere sidebar--in the magazine indicating the committees with seats open (annotated with the committees' missions)? And for ad hoc issues, why would it be so difficult to put a banner on the homepage announcing the need for input/volunteers/nominations?

Every...single...time I bring this up, I get the same reaction. This isn't supposition. It's FACT. People like to be asked. Indeed, some studies have shown that people who volunteer "tend" to have agendas, while those who are solicited bring with them more open-minded perspectives. Now, that's the result of research, not fact--but it makes ya think a bit, doesn't it? Like, how about that safety committee, hmmm? I'm sure it's no where near the situation with, oh, say, the USHJA's Hunter Breeding Committee, but take a look at the participants list anyway.

What's that saying from the bionic man? (Oh, crap--I actually found it online!)
"Gentlemen, we can rebuild him. We have the technology. We have the capability..."

[LexInVA]

And football? Did I miss some examples from that sport? Don't quarterbacks get their brains scrambled sometimes (or have they solved that problem with their helmet design)?

Helmet designs haven't really changed much in the last 30 years but some improvements have been made to mitigate neck injuries. There's only so much you can do with a helmet in a sport like that. To compare Darren's case to how the NFL would handle it, he would normally only have to be cleared by a team doctor. He might also have to be cleared by a doctor retained by the NFL if there is significant controversy (which would apply in this case) regarding his return to active competition. The NFL has final word on who plays and who sits out but generally they defer to the wisdom of the owners and their team doctors when it comes to the fitness of their players after serious injury.

[JER]

And football? Did I miss some examples from that sport? Don't quarterbacks get their brains scrambled sometimes (or have they solved that problem with their helmet design)?


The NFL has been notoriously lax in adopting a concussion policy. About a year ago, the NFL agreed to convene a 'concussion summit' (more here (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2007-06-19-concussions-summit_N.htm)) but AFAIK, no policy has been agreed on or implemented.

(Hockey conducted their own studies (also published in peer-reviewed journals) and implemented a program of concussion education and awareness, which apparently decreased concussion rates considerably.)

Keep in mind that the NFL (and NHL) is usually dealing with MTBI (mild traumatic brain injury). Football players' heads are crushed by other humans, not horses and football guys don't usually go into comas for days/weeks from their injuries.

[Sudi's Girl]

Thinking about other sports led me to thinking that they can play with injuries and not neccessarily take anyone else's life into his hands. Equestrian sports are obviously different - we're responsible for our mounts (a topic hotly discussed already).

However, this then lead me to think about driving - can Darren drive a car? If so, is he not taking everyone else's life into his hands the moment he hits the road and good judgement is required? If he is allowed to drive where HUMAN life is at stake, how are we going to convince him not to ride a horse? (not that I'm saying he shouldn't be riding - just playing a bit of devil's advocate here - I certainly am for his rehabilitation and getting back into the sport).

Anyway this is just a thought - I'm not even sure it's come up - I've only made it through about 80% of this thread.

[Gry2Yng]

I didn't say selections were always made this way or that way...and I sure as heck said NOTHING about "conspiracy"! My word, where the heck do you get that from??? Why, why, why do people use such distortion and exaggeration (probably for the same reason it works in politics, I guess). Anyway, committee make-ups (not just USEA, most small non-profits) are based on expedience--nothing more, nothing less. But it's MY opinion that the organization (and others like it) needs to move beyond expedience in how committees are formed, especially when critical issues need to be addressed (like safety).

Vineyridge, you mentioned what we tried in the past. Well, why do you refer to that and then turn around and act like I'm saying people shouldn't speak up? I have not said "don't criticize," I've been talking TONE. I've praised the ideas, but criticized the emotional attacks. Saying one doesn't like how it is put hardly means one doesn't want it to be expressed at all. Again, why do you choose to distort?



pwyn -

Please read my subsequent post (and also the edit to my original post) in which I say that I WAS NOT being sarcastic or inflammatory. I was merely stating that I have had a good experience volunteering for committees and that it has not been my experience that positions are handed out as rewards or in secret plots to do harm. (the definition of conspiracy). I did not mean to imply that YOU said anything about conspiracies. You are reading distortion and exaggeration where there is none. I realize that I need to be more careful how I phrase things when a thread gets this hot.

Honestly, sometimes a comment is just a comment, not an attack.

[mademoiselle]

Thinking about other sports led me to thinking that they can play with injuries and not neccessarily take anyone else's life into his hands. Equestrian sports are obviously different - we're responsible for our mounts (a topic hotly discussed already).

However, this then lead me to think about driving - can Darren drive a car? If so, is he not taking everyone else's life into his hands the moment he hits the road and good judgement is required? If he is allowed to drive where HUMAN life is at stake, how are we going to convince him not to ride a horse? (not that I'm saying he shouldn't be riding - just playing a bit of devil's advocate here - I certainly am for his rehabilitation and getting back into the sport).

Anyway this is just a thought - I'm not even sure it's come up - I've only made it through about 80% of this thread.

Between you and me, driving to the grocery store and to the barn, doesn't require as much skills as riding 2 horses at prelim' and 2 greenies in the YEH.
I'm not really challenged mentally when I drive to run errands, usually my car does whatever I ask it to do. On the other hand, my horses don't always do what I want:D

[Gry2Yng]

Yes, yes! That is the way it IS--but it is NOT the way it has to be. This is what, for some reason--and even when they have the means to do so--non-profits do time after time: they expect everyone to volunteer, without being asked. And yet study after study after study has shown that you get a far better response rate when you ASK--and the more specifically you ask, the better your responses. Why would it be so difficult to have a regular feature--heck, a mere sidebar--in the magazine indicating the committees with seats open (annotated with the committees' missions)? And for ad hoc issues, why would it be so difficult to put a banner on the homepage announcing the need for input/volunteers/nominations?

Every...single...time I bring this up, I get the same reaction. This isn't supposition. It's FACT. People like to be asked. Indeed, some studies have shown that people who volunteer "tend" to have agendas, while those who are solicited bring with them more open-minded perspectives. Now, that's the result of research, not fact--but it makes ya think a bit, doesn't it? Like, how about that safety committee, hmmm? I'm sure it's no where near the situation with, oh, say, the USHJA's Hunter Breeding Committee, but take a look at the participants list anyway.

What's that saying from the bionic man? (Oh, crap--I actually found it online!)
"Gentlemen, we can rebuild him. We have the technology. We have the capability..."


All being typed with a smile on my face, please read with a smile on your face...

I have been an area chairman. Believe me. I have asked until I am blue. I have begged for volunteers for the position of Young Rider Coordinator (at least 2 times), Treasurer, Adult Rider Coordinator (at least 2 times), awards chairman, newsletter editor, speaker coordinator, t-shirt designer, the list goes on. We place ads for open positions in the eNews in Area IV and also ads asking for help at the annual meeting, horse trials, etc. The best response rate I ever got was one person - who took the treasurer job and continues to do it. I also spent a good part of my 3 years as chair calling and calling and calling and getting turned down. Those who do say yes, might do so out of guilt, and they often do not fulfill their obligation.

It gets tiring. It is time consuming to call people you may not know and ask them for help and never hear back. That is why we fall back to the tried and true group that answer the request time and again. Not to mention, that I couldn't know everyone, their interest or availability. Honestly, I hate being asked, because it usually means I have to say no and disappoint someone. I am generally stretched to my limits. When I have some time, I put up my hand and offer to help. I also have a short list of people I know I can always count on in a pinch. They know that I am on their pinch list as well.

FWIW, I sent an email to Jo Whitehouse and Judy Ottovani shortly after the Safety Summit asking what I could do to help. Jo got back to me with a list of three things.

Studies may show that people like to be asked, but in my real world experience, the people who ultimately step up to the plate and take the job are the ones who ask "What can I do to help?" Sometimes those people have an agenda.

[Sudi's Girl]

Between you and me, driving to the grocery store and to the barn, doesn't require as much skills as riding 2 horses at prelim' and 2 greenies in the YEH.
I'm not really challenged mentally when I drive to run errands, usually my car does whatever I ask it to do. On the other hand, my horses don't always do what I want:D

I do understand what you're saying - and I agree with your comparison. (And, on a side, I wonder if that's what Darren is saying by dropping back a few levels with Windfall?) However, I'm talking more generally about preserving someone else's life here by using judgement (the quality in question I believe) and preserving the life of a horse. If driving didn't take any mental work, then there wouldn't be laws about driving incapacitated, am I wrong? We're not just worried about what our cars are doing, but what other cars are doing too...at least I have to daily here in the South :D

[bambam]

well I have offered to volunteer my time to USEA to more than one person and have yet to be taken up on my offers
Now I was not specific about committee or activity because I do not know where the need is but the problem is not as simple as people need to be asked to volunteer.
I am not going to keep offering- they do not seem interested or more likely have no system for passing on or processing this kind of information and so offers to help get lost unless the person offering is already a know entity. The onus should not be on volunteers to repeatedly seek out a response to offers to help (of course maybe it is just my help they do not want because my reputation precedes me;))

[Gry2Yng]

well I have offered to volunteer my time to USEA to more than one person and have yet to be taken up on my offers
Now I was not specific about committee or activity because I do not know where the need is but the problem is not as simple as people need to be asked to volunteer.
I am not going to keep offering- they do not seem interested or more likely have no system for passing on or processing this kind of information and so offers to help get lost unless the person offering is already a know entity. The onus should not be on volunteers to repeatedly seek out a response to offers to help (of course maybe it is just my help they do not want because my reputation precedes me;))

Have you tried your Area Chair? Sometimes that is a shorter route to a job. I can tell you that sometimes I would get an offer to help and at that particular moment, could not think of anything that needed to be done that was easy to delegate. Not using that as an excuse, just saying that it probably isn't you as much as my limited mental capacity, I don't want to speak for the limited mental capacity of others.

PT me. I could use some help with these projects.

[bambam]

my point is pwynn talked about convincing the USEA to ask for volunteers so they could get volunteers and I just do not think the issue is as simple as that. I think there is quite a bit of there being no system for processing information about offers of help and getting them to the right people or responding to the offeror (which would address your problem of not thinking of something off the top of your head when someone offers but there being a need down the road). But I think there is also a little bit of concern at USEA of involving "strangers" who are offering help but are unknown quantities (a little of which is legitimate- I could be, and possibly am, an ignorant, rabble-rousing wackjob :D) but there has to be a better response than ignoring the strangers. I am not trying to bash the USEA at all- I support it and think this is common is small organizations like this.
yes, based on your post, I might get a better response form my Area Chair but frankly I should not have to hunt down someone to take me up on an offer for my volunteered time :no:
I will PT you though- be careful what you ask for eh?;)

[Gry2Yng]

But I think there is also a little bit of concern at USEA of involving "strangers" who are offering help but are unknown quantities (a little of which is legitimate- I could be, and possibly am, an ignorant, rabble-rousing wackjob :D)

I work best with ignorant, rabble-rousing wackjobs, tho the relationship never lasts long. Once you get smart, you will dump me.

I understand what you are saying. Unfortunately for this organization, most things are still being done the old fashioned way, with limited money in the back office. I can't tell you how many times I have thrown my hands up in the air in frustration just because USEA cannot/does not take advantage of modern technology.

[GotSpots]

But I think there is also a little bit of concern at USEA of involving "strangers" who are offering help but are unknown quantities (a little of which is legitimate- I could be, and possibly am, an ignorant, rabble-rousing wackjob :D) but there has to be a better response than ignoring the strangers. Well, I can confirm at least the wackjob part of it, right? ;) Honestly, at least in part blame me on that one, not USEA. Transferring brain from real world to eventing world and back means things get lost in the mix, and I think I might have goofed on passing on a request.

On volunteering, I became involved because I was opinionated enough to say "Hey, what about X, Y, Z" and Flutie and Gry and others were dumb enough to listen to me, and foolish enough to think I might have a couple applicable skill sets. (Plus I have a cute dog, who I swear is what gets me admitted to most USEA meetings.) Generally speaking, in my experience in NGOs, volunteers who get - and stay - involved when not only do they volunteer to help, but they offer tangible skills that help an organization succeed, and they have sufficient time to be able to contribute with those skills. It's not just being an issue spotter; it's being able to offer substantive assets to fix the issue in a way that is net-positive. Gry is a super example - I have no idea what project she got given, but knowing Gry pretty well, I pretty much can guarantee that whatever it is, it'll be done, done perfectly, and done early, despite the million other things she has on her plate. I'm not saying other folks don't have those skill sets and abilities. Just that if you want to get and stay involved, that's how you get there.

[pwynnnorman]

Actually, nomination processes exist for a reason. Some think they only exist at a high level in an organization, but even for routine committee work--especially if it involves specialized skills or experiences--announcing and accepting nominations (and then inviting nominees) is a good way to find out who is out there, and typically, those nominated are NOT whack jobs.

On the other hand, the problem with creating committees on the basis of who you know (as in, you know isn't a whack job) is that you only get the views you know, too. There's a term out there for it, but I can't remember it exactly. Incestuous-something or other, I think.

Bit troublesome, of course, that if you want to volunteer, you have to prove you aren't a whack job first. A good chair should be able to handle the occasional whack-o anyway (and I'm sure they already exist on committees as is--we are discussing the horse world, after all ;)).


Just that if you want to get and stay involved, that's how you get there.


The problem with that statement, though, is that it puts the onus on the volunteer again. And while there are certainly plenty of people who do indeed "just" want to "get and stay involved," as I've said, peer-reviewed research has found that a signficant percentage of that type of volunteer comes with an agenda in tow. In the case of horse organizations, that person is often a trainer, show manager or rider, but can also be an owner, a parent (I'd guess this is the 2nd or 3rd largest category of horse sport volunteer) or even a vendor or professional of some kind (with business interests in the industry). That's why, if you really are interested in effective--not merely "controllable"--committees, you also ask and foster the genuinely philanthropic volunteer, too.

(And guess what? That type of volunteer often donates money, not just time, too!)

Again, though, I am NOT making a claim one way or another about USEA in discussing this.

[Gry2Yng]

In the case of horse organizations, that person is often a trainer, show manager or rider, but can also be an owner, a parent (I'd guess this is the 2nd or 3rd largest category of horse sport volunteer) or even a vendor or professional of some kind (with business interests in the industry). That's why, if you really are interested in effective--not merely "controllable"--committees, you also ask and foster the genuinely philanthropic volunteer, too.

.

Honestly, if I don't take any trainers, show managers, riders, owners, parents or vendors, who is left? Disinterested parties don't volunteer, EVER, even if you ask them.

As previously attested to by Spot. I handled the wacko's. Loved 'em in fact. Most AC's do pretty well with the wackos. It the lack-o follow thru -o's that I hate.

[CarrieK]

Yes, I will write a note for a patient if I think it will help them to do something that I think is perfectly safe. ...What this kind of "clearance" does NOT mean is that I've given the patient any sort of promise or guarantee that nothing could possibly happen.... I'd be shocked beyond belief if Darren came up with a piece of paper from a doctor stating his risk in participating in eventing is minimal and that the doctor felt there was minimal or no risk.
I had suffered post-partum depression for a couple years and then a huuuge situation in my life caused a meltdown and I was hospitalized for a week. I had to be "cleared" by the hospital to come back to work but in no way did that mean I was "cured." I was simpy OK enough to come back to work; it certainly didn't preclude any additional melt-downs (didn't have a nervous breakdown; didn't attempt suicide...I just melted down).

I'm a supervisor at my (crappy) job and we have to get "clearances" from doctors anytime an employee has used 3 or more sick-days in a row. It doesn't guarantee a thing, just means they're ok to walk back in the door and do the job. Doesn't even guarantee that they can do the job well, or at the level they were at before the sick period.

[Nikki^]

I learned a lot about TBI from this thread. I suffered a concussion when a mare that I was ridng snapped, ran around the round pen and started bucking like a rodeo horse. I bailed but my head hit the side of the round pen, followed by my arm. I always wear my helmet and it saved my life. I showed up the next day to clean stalls but the BO sent me home.

I had a fever from the swelling and it took a week and 3 adjustments for me to feel slightly better. Thankfully the MRI didn't show any damage. It was 3 months before I even felt comfortable to sit on a steady eddie horse.

This happened 5 years ago.

Here's what my arm looked like the next day
http://pets.webshots.com/photo/1161686928052670998IlTbkD
http://pets.webshots.com/photo/1161686952052670998KtBmUV
http://pets.webshots.com/photo/1161686973052670998VkXZWq

As for A Clockwork Orange (a great movie btw) is this that ad that everyone is talking about?

http://www.horsestrategy.com/communication/2006ultiumprintad_dchiacchia1.pdf

Do we have someone with uber photoshop skills?

[BaroquePony]

Nikki^,

Yep, that would be the ad.

Unh huh... I have Adobe CS2. What did you have in mind?

Some eyelashes, perhaps?

Edit: that's one heck of a bruise.

[blackwly]

Someone mentioned football players returning to play a few posts back...

As far as I'm aware, there has never been a football player with as severe a brain injury as Darren return to play. There is a huge volume of data about players returning to the field after more minor head injuries, but there is nothing published about atheletes with such a severe TBI returning to pro sports that I can find ANYWHERE on pub med.

Please, correct me if I am wrong. Unfortunately I think we are dealing with a very unusual situation here.

[JER]

Someone mentioned football players returning to play a few posts back...

As far as I'm aware, there has never been a football player with as severe a brain injury as Darren return to play. There is a huge volume of data about players returning to the field after more minor head injuries, but there is nothing published about atheletes with such a severe TBI returning to pro sports that I can find ANYWHERE on pub med.

Please, correct me if I am wrong. Unfortunately I think we are dealing with a very unusual situation here.

You're referring to my post. I did mention that football/hockey were concerned with mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI). Subdural hematomas and intracranial injury are exceedingly rare in these sports.

More relevant to eventing is the saga of NASCAR driver Ernie Irvan, who returned to the track after a serious TBI -- and then had another crash and TBI. He immediately retired and Irvan now promotes brain injury prevention and awareness.

Irvan was at the top of the NASCAR standings competing fiercely for the points championship in 1994 when he sustained life-threatening injuries in a horrific crash at MIS. Irvan triumphantly returned to the NASCAR circuit only to suffer a career-ending TBI in a crash at the same racetrack exactly five years to the day after the 1994 incident. After a long road to recovery which included learning to walk and talk all over again, Irvan became increasingly determined to use his NASCAR popularity and personal experience to help others. In February of 2004, he formed a non-profit organization called Race2Safety in order to educate the public about TBI and spearhead development of next-generation transportation head protection safety equipment for adults and children. Race2Safety is now a part of the Brain Injury Association of America, providing Ernie with the ability to spread his message across the country.

“You never really embrace how life-changing brain injury is until you experience it,” said Irvan. “My goals changed from being the top NASCAR driver in America to simply being able to take my daughter to school. I had a second and then a third chance at life, and I feel these chances were granted to me so that I could make a difference — so I could spread the word about brain injury awareness, protection and prevention.”

I believe NASCAR now has requirements for returning to the track after a TBI but I'm not a NASCAR fan -- maybe someone else knows?

[BaroquePony]

On another thread related to the eventing disasters of late, someone mentioned Formula 1 racing and how they fixed a large number of similar prolems a while back. There is a lot of Formula 1 research that can be used as well for eventing injuries.

I can't remember who it was that was very informed on this issue.

I will try to find it on the thread search thing.

[JER]

On another thread related to the eventing disasters of late, someone mentioned Formula 1 racing and how they fixed a large number of similar prolems a while back. There is a lot of Formula 1 research that can be used as well for eventing injuries.

I can't remember who it was that was very informed on this issue.

I will try to find it on the thread search thing.

:):):) That would also be me. (Love F1, don't get NASCAR.)

If anyone is interested in what F1 did about safety, get yourself a copy of Sid Watkins's book Life at the Limit: Triumph and Tragedy in Formula One. It's a great read and it shows what it means for a sport to get serious about safety. One of the most important elements is leadership which US eventing is sorely lacking.

[BaroquePony]

JER, boy am I glad you showed up. I couldn't get the search engine to do a thing with Formual 1.

I think you could be a great help here.

[vineyridge]

I'm sorry, Pwynn. If I distorted what you were saying I apologize. I thought you were saying "Leave it to the equine bureaucracy to resolve this." And you, of all people, should know that trying to affect TPTB is like trying to affect stone walls if you aren't plugged in to the Power Circuits.

[gully's pilot]

Speaking of NASCAR, the latest issue of Sports Illustrated had a pretty interesting article on how Dale Ernhart's death--or rather, NASCAR's response to his death--made that type of racing much safer. It doesn't really apply to eventing--they mandated the HANS device, created crushable walls (I guess the equivalent of frangible pins?) and devised a new car (the "Car of Tomorrow") with much more driver protection built in. What I liked about the article is how TBTB said 'these deaths are unacceptable', got some engineers to do a study, and fixed the top things the engineers mentioned.

I think it's the middle part we're missing. The article said that NASCAR was surprised by what the engineers told them--they were thinking along entirely different lines. Perhaps what we need are some scientists to help us--perhaps we're not quite on the right track, even with the best of intentions.

this is a little OT from Darren's situation, I know.

But I do want to say that I don't think that just because TBTB don't post their every action here it means they're doing nothing. And Jill, I commend you, but what's frustrating for those of us who aren't in your position is that we want to do something, but don't know what that something can be--we don't have DC's email address, and if we got it he wouldn't know who on earth we were.

[frugalannie]

And a quick return to the sport of hockey...

This past season, a Boston Bruins player (Patrice Bergeron?) was slammed into the side boards and knocked out. I don't recall how long he was unconscious or hospitalized, and I certainly am in no position to characterize the extent of his TBI, beyond applying Reed's criteria and calling it a Grade 3.

I do recall that the team would not let him play for the rest of the season, even though they were in need of his skills.

They set us a structured return to the ice for him, slowly allowing him to work out with the team and I think even scrimmage, although red-shirted. But they did not let him play. They hope he'll be back for next season.

Hockey may have developed a more defined system for TBI than other sports. Anyone here a hockey player?

[Nikki^]

Nikki^,

Yep, that would be the ad.

Unh huh... I have Adobe CS2. What did you have in mind?

Some eyelashes, perhaps?

Edit: that's one heck of a bruise.

Eyelashes would be great.

http://www.dvdreview.com/fullreviews/Images/ClockworkOrange/ClockworkOrange1.jpg
http://yourposterworld.com/images/clockwork%20orange%20film%20review.jpg

[JenJ]

I apologize in advance if this is old news or a repeat broadcast, but a New York TV channel is airing an interview with Darren at 11 pm tonight. They showed a few seconds of it yesterday with Darren looking quite thin and I have no idea at all if it is current.

[Ajierene]

Thanks for reminding us, Jen. Someone posted earlier the link to the online interview. It is not up now, but apparently will be by Wednesday.


For information about the upcoming interview, which will probably be online by Wednesday go here:

http://www.wgrz.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=59119

the link also includes a link to a video of the accident :eek:.

Christa

PS From a friend of the family and Darren, I heard that Darren is NOT right and he is NOT listening to his relatives.

[bambam]

Well, I can confirm at least the wackjob part of it, right? ;) Honestly, at least in part blame me on that one, not USEA. Transferring brain from real world to eventing world and back means things get lost in the mix, and I think I might have goofed on passing on a request.
Yes I blame you !!! ;) I figured you spread the word around about the wackjob part and are getting me blackballed (probably not a bad idea :lol:). Yes I spoke to you but you were only one of the people I spoke to and since that is not really your role and I did not follow up with you, my post was not directed at you (plus you did mention something I could do- which by the way I did). The person who cold calls or cold emails the USEA to volunteer their time is just probably not getting much of a response and I think that is a waste of resources.

[JER]

And a quick return to the sport of hockey...

This past season, a Boston Bruins player (Patrice Bergeron?) was slammed into the side boards and knocked out. I don't recall how long he was unconscious or hospitalized, and I certainly am in no position to characterize the extent of his TBI, beyond applying Reed's criteria and calling it a Grade 3.

I do recall that the team would not let him play for the rest of the season, even though they were in need of his skills.

They set us a structured return to the ice for him, slowly allowing him to work out with the team and I think even scrimmage, although red-shirted. But they did not let him play. They hope he'll be back for next season.

Hockey may have developed a more defined system for TBI than other sports. Anyone here a hockey player?


The Bruins wouldn't let Bergeron do anything involving contact for 6 months. They were very clear about the danger of a second TBI. The hockey season was over before he was ever cleared to play, although he was just at the 'clearing' point when the season ended. At three months, four months, five months post-TBI, he had bad headaches, focus issues and neuromuscular deficits.

Bergeron was not hospitalized very long with his initial injury -- he gave a press conference about a week later. Still, a Grade III is a Grade III.

The Toronto Star ran a two-part series on concussions in the NHL this year. It basically said that despite all the posturing, the NHL is still in big-time denial about TBIs.

[BaroquePony]

Nikki^,

I downloaded the .pdf. I have some things I need to do, but will be working on a good set of eyelashes and should have something in a day or so. I do good eyelashes.

[Nikki^]

Nikki^,

I downloaded the .pdf. I have some things I need to do, but will be working on a good set of eyelashes and should have something in a day or so. I do good eyelashes.

Don't forget the random floating eye ball too.:D

[fooler]

Don't forget the NFL Quarterback, either San Fran or Dallas, who was set down for a year and finally had to retire due to concussions. That was back in the late 1980's or early 1990's. NFL was gathering concussion data and reacting to it back then. Actually that was the first time I saw conclusive evidence of how damaging even one concussion could be, much less the cumulative effect.

[LexInVA]

Don't forget the random floating eye ball too.:D

Make it a GIF file and then it can twitch. :lol:

[pwynnnorman]

Have there been/how frequently are there/??? football TBIs that are as severe as, say, DCs? Someone indicated they usually milder (right?), but are their results more cumulative--more like boxing? Does that make a difference? And do you have to have a direct head-impact blow or jolt to cause problems--or can just, y'know, jostling around cause problems? (I'm thinking of when I get off 16.1h Colin and hit the ground unexpectedly, having been riding 14.0 handers previously. It sure sends a jolt right up through my head-or so it seems.) Can such jostling around over time produce unforseen issues--or does the brain kinda stabilize or regain its resilience or something?

Total ignoramus here, but today is Curiousity Day for me.

[deltawave]

Of course every individual is different, but the San Francisco 49ers QB Steve Young retired at the top of his game because of a series of non-grade-III concussions that left him with permanent deficits. A conspiracy of bad luck--he took two bad hits over the course of 3 weeks and that was sort of the last straw for him. He took his brain and went home and is still cognitively intact, although sadly his career is over.

His is a very interesting story, and a good example of how a series of non-life-threatening concussions can cumulatively devastate someone's career, or potentially devastate the person himself. He had good doctors, and he made the right choice, along with the team owners and coaching staff.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A00E4D9143AF935A25752C1A9609582 60

[BaroquePony]

Nikki^,

It has been a long time since I have seen Clockwork Orange. I don't remember the random floating eyeball (I know, duh). Plus, that sounds like it would need a 3-D application (like flash or an applette or something).

I can easily order a copy of Clockwork Orange and look at it (I don't have it in my collection of DVDs). Last time I rewatched CO was in 1990 and I watch to many films and look at too much artwork to remeber it all. Brain's like a sieve. In one side and out the other.

Otherwise, if you have any good promo stuff from Clockwork Orange that would refresh my baked brain on the 'random floating eyeball' that I could actually do with 2-D vector art, Illustrator or Photshop, either post a link on the thread or PM me or e-mail me or something.

I do a lot of 2-D Vector Illustration, but am limited to 2-D graphics at the moment.

Also, I was thinking of adding a phrase like, "It's all in the Timing". Usually to get better phrases than that one, I have to let it ramble around in my head for a few days, and I've been really busy.

I would love to see it "done right", with some quality rather than just a fast, bad version of a good idea.

[eks]

I think the hockey player, Eric Lindros also retired early in his career because he had suffered too many concussions.

[blackwly]

Have there been/how frequently are there/??? football TBIs that are as severe as, say, DCs? Someone indicated they usually milder (right)?

Yeah, P Wynn, that was basically my question. I work in the field (neurosurgery, not football) and I'm not personally aware of any pro atheletes returning to serious pro sports after a TBI as severe as DC's. The NASCAR driver mentioned by JER seemed like about the closest thing I've heard of.

Make no mistake...remaining unconscious for over a week is not really what is meant by the run-of-the-mill Grade 3 concussion (although it would technically be included in that category.) An injury such as this should really be considered a completely different entity than a concussion.

[Ajierene]

Of course every individual is different, but the San Francisco 49ers QB Steve Young retired at the top of his game because of a series of non-grade-III concussions that left him with permanent deficits. A conspiracy of bad luck--he took two bad hits over the course of 3 weeks and that was sort of the last straw for him. He took his brain and went home and is still cognitively intact, although sadly his career is over.

His is a very interesting story, and a good example of how a series of non-life-threatening concussions can cumulatively devastate someone's career, or potentially devastate the person himself. He had good doctors, and he made the right choice, along with the team owners and coaching staff.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A00E4D9143AF935A25752C1A9609582 60

This article illustrates some of the differences in the eventing world and organizations such as the NFL and NHL. The article stated he is headstrong about wanting to play, but cannot until the doctor's clear him.

He has a coach saying 'no'. Darren does not have someone with the ability to stand infront of the start box and say 'no'. If Darren were on the Olympic team, he could be pulled. He is not on a team, though, he has no coach, no system in place like that.

The only thing that can really happen is if the owners of the horses he is riding do not let him. They may be thinking that if he says he is alright, he is alright. They may think that it will be ok because it is not the horses' top level. Who knows - but at the same time, any horses that Darren owns, no one can stop him from riding. The USEA just is not set up to handle these types of situations and without money/volunteers, they never will be. The NFL gets paid by corporations and the states that own the teams - it is a very different situation than the USEA is in.

[RunForIt]

A good friend of mine offerred this idea today - maybe Darren is ready to compete again IF the info coming out of the hospital and into the news/internet wasn't accurate...could that be possible? Could Darren NOT have suffered a TBI? Just asking...

[JER]

Here are two sports-related serious TBI cases for comparison:

In April 2006, young pro cyclist Saul Raisin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Raisin) crashed in a race in Europe, causing a brain injury which required surgery. He was in a coma, went to rehab, then started training on his bike again. By early 2007, he said he was ready to race again but his team said no. As of November 2007, Raisin's neurological and psychiatric evaluations were all fine but his team refused to let him race because of the risk of re-injury. (If anyone objects to my linking to Wikipedia, the same info is scattered around various cycling sites.)

In August 2007, a top NZ triathlete was hit by a car while cycling (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10456232) (interview here (http://www.satellite.ac.nz/articles/columns/2008/03/profile-anna-hamilton/)). She spent 10 days in a coma, then recovered enough to resume training. While she is back to training 2-3 hours/day, she says she has brain damage from the accident and she will not be competing this year. As she put it: "I wanted to compete in this season’s races, but all my doctors have strongly advised me not to, so I will wait till next season."

Interesting. In the first case, he's stopped from returning to cycling by the terms of a professional riding contract -- for well over a year following the crash, even though he can pass the evaluations. He's under contract to Credit Agricole, if they say he can't compete, he can't compete. We can assume medical advisers are making the determination for the team. In the second case, the athlete is taking the advice of her doctors and sitting out for a year.

[RunForIt]

Here are two sports-related serious TBI cases for comparison:

In April 2006, young pro cyclist Saul Raisin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Raisin) crashed in a race in Europe, causing a brain injury which required surgery. He was in a coma, went to rehab, then started training on his bike again. By early 2007, he said he was ready to race again but his team said no. As of November 2007, Raisin's neurological and psychiatric evaluations were all fine but his team refused to let him race because of the risk of re-injury. (If anyone objects to my linking to Wikipedia, the same info is scattered around various cycling sites.)

In August 2007, a top NZ triathlete was hit by a car while cycling (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10456232) (interview here (http://www.satellite.ac.nz/articles/columns/2008/03/profile-anna-hamilton/)). She spent 10 days in a coma, then recovered enough to resume training. While she is back to training 2-3 hours/day, she says she has brain damage from the accident and she will not be competing this year. As she put it: "I wanted to compete in this season’s races, but all my doctors have strongly advised me not to, so I will wait till next season."

Interesting. In the first case, he's stopped from returning to cycling by the terms of a professional riding contract -- for well over a year following the crash, even though he can pass the evaluations. He's under contract to Credit Agricole, if they say he can't compete, he can't compete. We can assume medical advisers are making the determination for the team. In the second case, the athlete is taking the advice of her doctors and sitting out for a year.

these are the sort of athletic type of "evidence" that need to be emailed to USEF and USEA (David and Kevin)/

Does the AMA have any bulleted info re: cautions and DON'T PUT YOURSELF AT RISK sort of "scientific evidenced" info that can be used to support our concerns?

again, I'm concerned for Darren, BUT, if he was involved in a sport like downhill skiing that didn't involve another living animal OR if his actions didn't have the potential to harm eventing as a sport OR if his actions didn't have the potential to lead others to possible physical harm and their horses the same - GO FOR IT!!!! Sadly, that's not the case here. :( :no:

[BogyNme]

His family kept his website updated with what was going on. So most of the information available to the public was directly from the family...

A good friend of mine offerred this idea today - maybe Darren is ready to compete again IF the info coming out of the hospital and into the news/internet wasn't accurate...could that be possible? Could Darren NOT have suffered a TBI? Just asking...

[JER]

Ok, here's another one: A 23 year-old freeskier crashed, lost consciousness for 3 minutes, then was put into a medically-induced coma due to his TBI. Forget all the standard jokes about freeskiers, this interview (http://www.lat34.com/cr_johnson_profile) is very good.

His honest talk about his injury reminded me of a website I found a while back when one of my friends had a severe TBI. The Traumatic Brain Injury Survival Guide (http://www.tbiguide.com/) is a booklet put together by a neuropsychologist to help TBI patients and their caregivers know what to expect during the recovery process. There's a section called Emotional Stages of Recovery (http://www.tbiguide.com/emotionalstages.html) that's worth reading, especially the parts about the Testing Phase and Uneasy Acceptance.

The next phase almost always follows after a period of recovery and improvement in thinking abilities. When people eventually realize they are improving, they go through the testing phase. Basically, they test themselves to see their limits. To some degree, there's a little bit of denial in this. The person feels, "I'm really close to the way I was, so I'll just act the way I was. I'll do things as I always did."

The next phase is what I call uneasy acceptance. This is when head-injured people learn where they stand and what their limits are. They've learned after many failings and many times of paying for it, that they can only handle a limited number of hours of work or play.

[RAyers]

Does the AMA have any bulleted info re: cautions and DON'T PUT YOURSELF AT RISK sort of "scientific evidenced" info that can be used to support our concerns?



I posted those at the beginning of the thread.

Reed

[2Cool4U]

This is my first post ever on COTH, so bear with me...not trying to make any point here, I just thought it was interesting.

I had an appointment with my neurosurgeon today. He is a top neurosurgeon in the southeast. While I was there, I thought I would ask him what he would do in a case like Darren's. I explained the extent of Darren's injury to him. He said "by no means, would he clear a patient with an injury like Darren's to ever jump again". :eek: He would clear a rider to ride (flat/dressage) when the time was right, but not at 4 months post-injury. I also asked him whether he would actually put a clearance in writing in such a case. He said that he would have no problem submitting a clearance in writing when the time was right.

This surgeon has elite athletes as patients. He said that he does not give clearance for football players, soccer players...and another sport I can't remember...for return to their sport after injuries like Darren's. However, he said he does typically clear baseball players.

[deltawave]

Reed, if you're reading COTH but not your email--check your email. :)

Signed,

DW's braiding service ;)

[PalominoMorgan]

Was discussing this with my mom over the weekend who is a CT technician. My mom's comment was not that two neurosugeons cleared Darren. She wondered how many others declined to give their consent. Just a thought. I'll be watching the local TV special tonight and if I'm not up I'll be taping it to watch tomorrow morning. The local previews look interesting.

[Nomoreusernames]

My only concern with the WGRZ interview is that it will portray him as a very brave person for moving forward so quickly after the accident and therefore encourage the "irresponsible" (for lack of a better word, because, of course, he should not be responsible for this) behavior.

[CarrieK]

That's true because we all love overcoming-the-odds stories. What's not to love about someone who has the wherewithal to come back from whatever brought them down and to be winners?

If he competes with no repercussions (I don't know why but I still feel compelled to add that that's the outcome we're all hoping for), added with the overcoming-obstacles slant...well, I see some people regarding the issue as a no harm/no foul (no continued harm, rather) and all of this discussion as worry-wart hand-wringing.

That possibility concerns me. Not what folks might say about the individuals in this discussion, of course, but possibly dismissing our concern.

[BaroquePony]

News interviewers are notorius for manipulating the truth:yes:

[PalominoMorgan]

I do wish he'd have a little more of what he counted as the 2nd blessing to come out of this - patience. Wishing him the best of luck, but still worried for him even though he seems to be unconcerned.

From a non-horsey perspective it was a well done piece. Being a horseman there is one shot of him schooling that isn't the most flattering, but other than that it was a nice piece... all other issues aside.

[Nomoreusernames]

Watched the interview. He said he won't rush it.

[Christa P]

I do wish he'd have a little more of what he counted as the 2nd blessing to come out of this - patience. Wishing him the best of luck, but still worried for him even though he seems to be unconcerned.

From a non-horsey perspective it was a well done piece. Being a horseman there is one shot of him schooling that isn't the most flattering, but other than that it was a nice piece... all other issues aside.

I agree with what was said. The interview is already on the website at:

http://www.wgrz.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=59216&catid=37

It will be interesting to see what some friends of his have to say when I see them tomorrow.

Christa

PS NOTHING is said about his return to comptetition coming up this weekend. Also, the comment about his giving back with Knox Farm - the deal was done long before his injury so while his intentions might be the same (giving back), the accident had nothing to do with it.

[RiverBendPol]

I have finally waded my way thru this whole pile of pages. Good for most of you, for seeing the possible atrocities which could come from a Darren Chiacchia accident.
My big beef with Darren at this point is not that he wants to get out and compete-I cannot blame him for that. If he was an extreme skier or a tennis pro or a surfer dude, I'd wish him well, have a blast. Hell, I'd probably even wax his skis for him. If Darren wants to continue thinking he is a god who succumbs to no one and obeys only his own rules, well, fine, then, more power to him. HOWEVER, he is not one of those single sportsmen. If Darren goes down because he's riding too soon after a TBI (the T stands for TRAUMATIC, remember?) he will not only do damage to himself. If Darren goes down, he will take a horse down with him and the grand sport of Eventing will gain yet another black eye. Not to mention the trauma which will be thrust upon the spectators, EMTs, vets, organizers, TDs, judges and all the youngsters who, for some unknown reason, idolize the man.
I am so furious I can't see straight. I do not have the answer. Perhaps the dressage judge can eliminate him. Maybe he'll eliminate himself before he gets into trouble. New rules at this point, I fear will be unreasonable, because of being made under intense pressure. Whatever happens, I hope to Goodness those lovely horses can be kept safe.

[allpurpose]

I have finally waded my way thru this whole pile of pages. Good for most of you, for seeing the possible atrocities which could come from a Darren Chiacchia accident.
My big beef with Darren at this point is not that he wants to get out and compete-I cannot blame him for that. If he was an extreme skier or a tennis pro or a surfer dude, I'd wish him well, have a blast. Hell, I'd probably even wax his skis for him. If Darren wants to continue thinking he is a god who succumbs to no one and obeys only his own rules, well, fine, then, more power to him. HOWEVER, he is not one of those single sportsmen. If Darren goes down because he's riding too soon after a TBI (the T stands for TRAUMATIC, remember?) he will not only do damage to himself. If Darren goes down, he will take a horse down with him and the grand sport of Eventing will gain yet another black eye. Not to mention the trauma which will be thrust upon the spectators, EMTs, vets, organizers, TDs, judges and all the youngsters who, for some unknown reason, idolize the man.
I am so furious I can't see straight. I do not have the answer. Perhaps the dressage judge can eliminate him. Maybe he'll eliminate himself before he gets into trouble. New rules at this point, I fear will be unreasonable, because of being made under intense pressure. Whatever happens, I hope to Goodness those lovely horses can be kept safe.

Well said, especially your last sentence, because I think the bottom line in all this is, "...those lovely horses."

[BaroquePony]

Hell, I'd probably even wax his skis for him.

I'd love to wax his skis:yes:

It's his horses and the sport I am worried about.

[ideayoda]

(The vid doesnt play easily all the way through....but...)Does anyone look at that video and not seen that those problems were coming wayyyyy earlier (approach/line to two previous/tempo to second/etc) than the sticking in of the three strides? I would worry if the comments are solid analysis for riding safely now.

[BaroquePony]

I couldn't get the video to run through right, only the audio.

Anyway, I think the thing that bothers me the most is that he is the Head of the Safety Committee (or whatever the correct name for it is) and doing this.

I wouldn't care as much if he weren't in that position.

If he makes all clear rounds I really do not think it sets up a good example for younger or more inexperinced riders.

I also have a hard time with the fact that he is most likely putting his horses into a much higher risk situation.

Eventing (or any jumping, or anything I guess) is about percentage and probabilty combined with knowledge, athletic abilty and conditioning.

If you start tinkering with things that aren't starting off at 100%, then the probabilties change exponentially. Not a good idea.

[Fairview Horse Center]

What about the company that insures the horses? Any chance of them stopping this?

[CarrieK]

I'd love to wax his skis:yes:


:eek:

[LexInVA]

What about the company that insures the horses? Any chance of them stopping this?

There is no precedent of such an action but if they wanted to, they could simply terminate the policy which wouldn't mean much in the end. There are only three entities that can really stop Darren from riding: the USEF, the horse owners, and Darren himself.

[Hilary]

I did get the video to run, although the first time it wasn't working and all I got was a still of the horse and someone screaming....

It was horrible. The horse peeked at the bank, dropped down and never got his engine back. He stuffed three teensy 'backwards' strides and never got his front end off the ground and somersaulted over the fence. When the horse popped up, Darren looked like a rag doll dangling by his foot - the horse did not run off, fortunately.

I really really hope that by the time this weekend rolls around he decides, or someone decides for him, that he should not ride. Maybe he can do a dressage test. But wouldn't sitting trot even be jarring for a healing brain?

And his Stuart entry says it's missing the emergency contact info.....

[Pixie Dust]

That was a horrible fall, very hard to watch.

I'm not so certain he's a threat to his horses, but the idea of his hitting his head again is really scary.

[dressagetraks]

Horrible to watch. Not knowing which fence the problem was going to be at, I actually was half expecting it at the jump before; he did not look right there or at any point on approach to the one where he fell. I was holding my breath when Darren was hung up in the stirrup afterwards. The horse was just shaking his head and looking stunned.

How is the horse doing? I know they said he was not physically hurt, which is amazing given that fall, but I'm sure that would do nothing for any horse's confidence.

[JenJ]

I don't think it was necessary for the TV interview to show the fall multiple times and then in slow motion - at least they could have given a viewer warning - that was sickening to see.
That poor horse.
Darren's statement that the accident resulted from "a young and inexperienced horse" misreading the question, is the best illustration I have heard for the argument that young and/or inexperienced horses, no matter the expertise and skill of the rider, should be allowed to spend more time at the lower levels where the horse can make and learn from such mistakes, without its life, and that of the rider, being in jeopardy.

[Dr. Doolittle]

I don't think it was necessary for the TV interview to show the fall multiple times and then in slow motion - at least they could have given a viewer warning - that was sickening to see.
That poor horse.
Darren's statement that the accident resulted from "a young and inexperienced horse" misreading the question, is the best illustration I have heard for the argument that young and/or inexperienced horses, no matter the expertise and skill of the rider, should be allowed to spend more time at the lower levels where the horse can make and learn from such mistakes, without its life, and that of the rider, being in jeopardy.

:yes: :yes:

[vxf111]

Just to give you some insight from another sport, a professional baseball player-- Ryan Church recently suffered his second concussion in two months. For some reason I don't understand, the Mets allowed him to play following the 2nd concussion and the guy clearly was NQR. He was cleared by the Mets' doctors. Since then, he's been off and on the DL and when you watch him, even sitting in the dugout, he doesn't appear normal and healthy. Getting multiple head injuries in a short period of time can do SERIOUS damage to you. Serious damage.

[goobs]

Yikes - that was very hard to watch. Darren seems to be okay though and the video of him jumping looks like he hasn't lost any of his form (it's perfect). He may be okay doing this. I can't imagine that he is going to go for time on xc and Windfall is very experienced and may take care of him. I am still worried though.

But it is what it is. How many others are out there competing after a TBI that we do not know of? A lot. A friend of mine reminded me that he had a rotational fall at Advanced level (about 30 years ago) - was in a coma for 4 days (no other physical injuries) and went back to competing in a few months (and qualified for the National Championship in his country). He had another grade 3 concussion about 10 years ago where he was out for a good half hour and lost all short term memory. He hasn't suffered any symptoms from both of those - thank goodness.

When I was 17 I got whacked hard by an 18 wheeler - I guess it was a grade 3 (until I read this thread I didn't know that I had a grade 3 or how serious they are!). I did get knocked out cold and woke up to 3 men looking over me (one was the driver and was crying she's dead I killed her!). I got up and walked about with a HORRIBLE headache (concussed and skull fracture). I've banged my head quiet hard from riding (landing on top of my head once!) to the point of seeing stars but thank goodness I've never experienced any strange symptoms.

I am not trying to justify Darren's actions but what else can we do except hold our breath until he crosses the finish line? He said he will pull up if he feels that things aren't going well so I am trusting his statement. I wish he would take it a bit easier - as in not doing I at Stuarts - but he has been riding and schooling all 3 phases and he probably feels confident that he is ready to go GVH.

[Invested1]

Ryan Church recently suffered his second concussion in two months. .

:sigh: Can't believe the Nats let him go.

[Fairview Horse Center]

There is no precedent of such an action but if they wanted to, they could simply terminate the policy which wouldn't mean much in the end. There are only three entities that can really stop Darren from riding: the USEF, the horse owners, and Darren himself.

If I had an expensive horse, and the insurnace company was threatening to terminate the policy due to added risks, I would surely re-think allowing that to happen.

[Jazzy Lady]

I clicked on the video... then I saw Baron gallop into view and quickly flipped it off. This whole experience has had a big impact on me, and I think I might quit the sport if I saw darren hanging like a ragdoll from the stirrups. :eek:.

I want so much for him to come back and be the old Darren, cocky, self assured, and a fantastic rider... I hope he's safe. I really do. I guess I'll be seeing him at Stuart, and I pray that it goes without a hitch.

[Gnep]

Formula 1
Robert Kubica had a huge crash last year in Montreal, its realy worth watching it on y-tube.
He had not TBI, just a mild concusion, he was not allowed to race for 4 weeks and only than when the FIA Doc gave him the clearance. Not any Doc but the specialist accepted by the Organisation.
Same thing with Ralf Schumacher after his crash at Indi. Those Racing stables have to list a relieve driver at the begining of the season in case that a regular driver gets sidelined by a crash.
No driver is allowed back into the car, after a crash, without the clearance of the FIA docs, even after a testing crash.

The acumulation, 3 years ago I had a rather good crash, galloping TBs, was knocked out for 5 minutes, basicly like a boxer, good concusion.
Last year I hit with the head at Penrose, very mild concusion, no worry acording to the doc.
Than I had this huge one at Gras Ridge, did not hit with the head, I remeber coming around the S-turns, I do not remember poping over the table and than the drop into the water, blank.
4 weeks later Las Cruces, had to give my Woman a very sweet and smooth ride, which I did.
In the evening brutal headachs.
Docs explanation, that I had bruised my brain twice this year including the biggy 3 years ago I was on the way to do some permanent damage if I would not give it some good time to heal.
Luckily we had a real long winter, no riding for 6 month was the docs advice and than just lower stuff for a nother 6 month. The landings and take ofs jumping, drop landings etc. are bruising if you have already banged up the gray matter. The higher the jump the more bruising.

My bone crunsher compares the stress onto the body that a Intermediat delivers to a frontal car crash at 30 miles/hour.

[tikidoc]

I watched the interview, I was struck by how totally reasonable he sounded, saying that he is taking things slow, aiming for the WEGs in 2010, etc. That's two years from now, so it makes it sound as if he IS being patient and taking his time to come back. No mention was made (unless I missed it) of competing FIVE horses in the very near future. I would have loved to see an interview with a neurosurgeon, talking about what could happen if he had another fall. We hear about his wonderful recovery, but nothing about the risks of another accident, even if it is less severe than the first.

In medicine, we are taught about principles of ethics and how they often conflict. Four important principles include benefence (do good), non-maleficence (do no harm), autonomy (rights of individuals to self determination), and justice (weighing the good of the individual and the good of society). It appears that the two guiding principles in DC's case are autonomy and justice.

Bottom line, if you took this to ethicists, they would argue about it all day long and probably never come up with an answer. My own personal view, which is shared by many here, is that his right to autonomy may be limited by the after effects of his TBI, and the potential harm to the many (the sport of eventing and eventers as a group) outweighs his individual autonomy (justice).

[Ajierene]

(The vid doesnt play easily all the way through....but...)Does anyone look at that video and not seen that those problems were coming wayyyyy earlier (approach/line to two previous/tempo to second/etc) than the sticking in of the three strides? I would worry if the comments are solid analysis for riding safely now.

I am by far an expert, so thought about holding my tongue, but I did a bit of a double take when Darren (talking over scenes of the final jump) said the horse was inexperienced and misjudged. Isn't it the job of the trainer to compensate for this? Isn't it the trainer's job not to take the horse up the levels before it is ready?

I kept looking at that line and wondering why Darren didn't tell the horse to jump instead of sticking an extra stride in - isn't it his job? If he is going to make a mistake like this when he is 100%, what about now? Am I missing something?

Like I said before - even competing one horse is not my issue as much as competing 5 horses in a weekend. I know people say in three days, you have something like 5 hours between rides if you ride more than one horse - but I still think fatigue had something to do with Laine Ashker's accident. You aren't really resting, adrenaline is pumping until it runs out, you are thinking about your next ride, you have the hub bub of the show around you distracting you from really resting, etc. If something (Heaven forbid) happens to Darren - I am willing to wager it will be on a later horse.

EDIT: I did get a bit of a chuckle of them showing Darren at a point when his horse was misbehaving in schooling and tossing his head. I can see the non-horsey production room saying 'doesn't that look cool, the horse looks so spirited! Let's put it in there!'

[Nikki^]

[quote=BaroquePony;3346898]Nikki^,

It has been a long time since I have seen Clockwork Orange.

Oh, it's on the poster. Just put an eyeball on the poster somewhere.

http://www.70tallet.no/film/clockwork-orange.jpg

I can't wait to see what it's going to look like. :D

ETA: Here's a video of a rotational fall head on. WARNING!!! WARNING!!! It's pretty horrific.
This was at the Asian games. It's a new report and is in Arabic but you get the idea:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvGmjy1CubE

[snoopy]

For what is worth I thought Darren's interview was methodic and clear....but then again Darren is a GREAT interview anyway. The fall, well, it is what it is really. Nothing like that looks good. But I have to say he comes accross lucid and realistic about wanting to get back to business. Although one cannot possibly know the full extent of where he is at mentally and physically from this short clip....it is nice to see that he has a sense of humour, is getting better, and doing what loves. However it still does not sit well with me his decison to compete so soon after...

[Invested1]

If he competes with no repercussions (I don't know why but I still feel compelled to add that that's the outcome we're all hoping for), added with the overcoming-obstacles slant...well, I see some people regarding the issue as a no harm/no foul (no continued harm, rather) and all of this discussion as worry-wart hand-wringing.

That was my thought too. And while I *wholeheartedly* hope that he (and his horses) walks away unscratched from his next event, that, in itself, will open up a whole other can of worms.
The next person (UL or LL) who has a TBI can think, "Shoot, Darren got back in the saddle in record time and was FINE! I can too!!"

[Pixie Dust]

I didn't know I was supposed to tell my horse to jump. How would I do that?

[Spoilsport]

I also watched the interview and, in all honesty, thought he sounded reasonable and clear-headed and charming. I wish those who have seen him and say he is "not quite right" can explain what they mean. I am not doubting it, just admitting that after following this thread I was surprised at how clear-headed he sounded in the interview (better than me on a good day :winkgrin:). Maybe he is superman :eek:!

Pixie Dust - I don't understand your question. I am not an eventer, except for a random horse trial here and there over the years :lol: In showjumping I assume responsibility for the distances and strides. I know eventing is different, that the rider stays out of the way a lot more, but I too was surprised that he blamed the accident entirely on a young and inexperienced horse, as if the rider has no accountability at all. It seemed a little odd, charming as I found Darren to be in the interview.

[findeight]

Just an HP...the only word I can think of is gobsmacked over this whole thing...Reading that article, can't watch the vid right now, am amazed at all the "never seen anybody heal so quick" and "taking it slow" comments.

After having read this thread and seen the concerns of those around him and knowing he plans to compete 5 soon...what page is he on and where are we?

And, worst, what horseman ever blamed a horse's inexperience for a fall after putting him in a position where inexperience would lead to a wreck? That's called pilot error and arrogance. But what do I know...not my sport.

[sisu27]

I think the hockey player, Eric Lindros also retired early in his career because he had suffered too many concussions.

His brother Brett retired early because of concussions although Eric suffered a few too many as well.

[Ajierene]

I didn't know I was supposed to tell my horse to jump. How would I do that?

I think you posted after this and the quote said it was from you, but it was from me.

I will elaborate, and it 'agrees' with findeight's post. As a trainer, you have to sometimes tell you horse to jump. I don't know if you ever trained horses before or how you trained them -