Montador's family sues NHL. Claims fighting leads to depression & addiciton

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

I would wager that more concussions stem from hockey plays. Nothing to support that, just my opinion.

To be clear again—because you and others continue to ignore this rather crucial point—the issue is not "concussions," the issue is repetitive brain trauma. All the available evidence rather overwhelmingly shows that those who regularly participate in hockey fights are at very high risk to sustain repetitive brain trauma. Based on everything that we know, regular participation in hockey fights is much more likely to result in CTE than suffering concussions caused by hockey plays. This is because of the dramatically higher number of incidents of repetitive brain trauma that occur in hockey fights.

Why is this so hard to grasp?

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

To be clear again—because you and others continue to ignore this rather crucial point—the issue is not "concussions," the issue is repetitive brain trauma. All the available evidence rather overwhelmingly shows that those who regularly participate in hockey fights are at very high risk to sustain repetitive brain trauma. Based on everything that we know, regular participation in hockey fights is much more likely to result in CTE than suffering concussions caused by hockey plays. This is because of the dramatically higher number of incidents of repetitive brain trauma that occur in hockey fights.

Why is this so hard to grasp?

How can that deduction be made though? The same people that are getting punched in the head are the same people that play a physical game and are dishing out and receiving multiple body checks a night.

[ernie]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

God I miss the days when people were responsible for their own actions.

How did anyone 'make' him play with a concussion???

Oh right, he wanted to continue to make a portion of his career 10.6 million dollar earnings.

It's terrible that his hockey career 'lifestyle' had an almost unarguable effect on his brain, but at what point are people responsible for their own choices?

And if he refused to play exactly how long is he making that money for? Is threat of your job not "making" someone play?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

...these law suits really bother me. Most of the people involved with these suits sit there and see no problem collecting a pay check for ten years knowing full well what they are doing and the risk they are assuming.

So, this is a completely baseless stereotype. Who are "most people" in this sentence, and how is it you are certain about their awareness of the risks of their behaviour?

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

...Most of the families would have been telling people for years how proud they are that there loved one was in the NHL, and soon as the lifestyle/celebrity gravy train ends, it's "what a monster the NHL is, they are responsible for my issues".

In this second bald assertion, you have now projected motives and intents from nothing more than the report offered yesterday about the Montadors filing suit. It is also a baseless stereotype.

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

...I'm just going to stop posting on the subject because really it's pointless because I don't think there's anything that anyone could say that would convince me that someone who enters a professional contact sports league isn't aware there's a risk associated with playing their sport which could result in long term and debilitating injuries.

Again, you continue to gloss over this crucial point by making the equivocation fallacy between the rather generic "long term and debilitating injuries," and extremely dangerous and life threatening complications resulting from the eminently preventable incidence of CTE.

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

...We aren't talking about situations like Boogard where the NHL appears to have clearly have dropped the ball on their substance abuse program. We are talking about law suits for injuries sustained while playing a physical game, and it was the participants choice to involve themselves in that game.

On the contrary, this is exactly what this lawsuit is about. How convenient for you to ignore the established connections made between Boogaard's substance abuse and self destructive behaviour and CTE.

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

...I don't think there is any debating that physical sports like hockey and football cause serious injuries that may extent long past playing career. I'm debating that in playing these sports, you are accepting that risk and it's hypocritical to turn around and sue the league when you are done when you implied your consent by getting on the playing field in the first place.

Again, your insistence on pretending that this specific issue is only about "accepting risks" is quite tiresome and naive. It has been said numerous times in previous posts: Not all risks are the same, and it is not well established at all that players are adequately well informed of all the risks. Furthermore, not all risks are in any context acceptable. If the incidence of CTE can be dramatically reduced, then every effort should be made to reduce them. I don't know any more about the Montador lawsuit than you do, but I suspect that the possibility of increasing awareness and putting pressure on the NHL to change dangerous policies is quite likely a large part of their motivation.

[saillias]

Never been more grateful to be on the same side of a debate as Textcritic. You point out the fallacies like a champ.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

How can that deduction be made though? The same people that are getting punched in the head are the same people that play a physical game and are dishing out and receiving multiple body checks a night.

Through research. Based on the ongoing research to this point in time all the available evidence suggests that hockey players who suffer serious head trauma from hockey plays that effectively end their careers are not nearly as at risk as those who regularly participate in fights. By numerous counts, Marc Savard and Chris Pronger are recovering from multiple concussions suffered as a result of hockey plays, and are not exhibiting the same kinds of symptoms and self destructive behaviour that characterize the cases of Bob Probert, Derek Boogard, Steve Montador, and others.

What we know so far is still circumstantial, but it is pretty compelling. Until the day that the suicide rate among numerous former hockey players with no history of fighting begins to spike, it seems that fighting is what is presenting the highest level of danger here.

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by saillias

Never been more grateful to be on the same side of a debate as Textcritic. You point out the fallacies like a champ.

There's no fallacies at all. He's commenting on CTE and other side affects, and ignoring what other people are saying. There's not a single sane person that would argue any of his points on CTE. I don't see any single person in this thread arguing for a second that there isn't a direct correlation between CTE and hockey/contacts sports/fighting etc.

What people are saying is that those who willingly sign up to play a sport such as hockey know goddamn well that it could be detrimental to their health, and in lacing the skates up are directly implying their consent to that risk. No one forced these guys to play in the NHL. No one seemed to have a problem with it while they were still in the league. I have a lot of respect for people like Chris Boland of the 49ers who walked away from their sport because they felt it could be detrimental to their health long-term and to the health of others.

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Through research. Based on the ongoing research to this point in time all the available evidence suggests that hockey players who suffer serious head trauma from hockey plays that effectively end their careers are not nearly as at risk as those who regularly participate in fights. By numerous counts, Marc Savard and Chris Pronger are recovering from multiple concussions suffered as a result of hockey plays, and are not exhibiting the same kinds of symptoms and self destructive behaviour that characterize the cases of Bob Probert, Derek Boogard, Steve Montador, and others.

What we know so far is still circumstantial, but it is pretty compelling. Until the day that the suicide rate among numerous former hockey players with no history of fighting begins to spike, it seems that fighting is what is presenting the highest level of danger here.

Football seems to have a lot of mental health issues with retired players. They don't fight in that league.

I'm not going there though, because i'm not getting suckered into an anti-fighting debate in hockey, which is exactly what you are trying to turn this into.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

Football seems to have a lot of mental health issues with retired players. They don't fight in that league.

No, but they collide with their heads and get hit in the head, on almost every play, especially in the line. That's akin to fighting (as opposed to falling, normal checking, etc).

Compare football to rugby, where arm tackling is predominant.

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

No, but they collide with their heads and get hit in the head, on almost every play, especially in the line. That's akin to fighting (as opposed to falling, normal checking, etc).

Compare football to rugby, where arm tackling is predominant.

Same issues exist in Rugby. I just did a google search and quite a few articles popped right up talking about the same things we are here.

Football definitely has more head contact that hockey, but there is still plenty of head contact in hockey as part of the regular game, and these guys heads get snapped back violently all the time by body checks.

Anyways, I'm not arguing that contact sports don't lead to CTE and other issues. It's pretty evident to me that they do. Never going to get rid of it though unless contact sports stopped being played.

I'm saying that the risk is known, so if you play those sports professionally, I have a hard understanding how you can sue the league you willingly participated in placing the fault on them. At some point you have to sit back and say you signed up for this, especially when your own player's union is the NHL's biggest road block in making any significant changes.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

Same issues exist in Rugby. I just did a google search and quite a few articles popped right up talking about the same things we are here.

Concussions or depression/suicide?

Anyway, it's easy to find a couple examples. It's harder to establish a trend.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

What people are saying is that those who willingly sign up to play a sport such as hockey know goddamn well that it could be detrimental to their health, and in lacing the skates up are directly implying their consent to that risk. No one forced these guys to play in the NHL. No one seemed to have a problem with it while they were still in the league. I have a lot of respect for people like Chris Boland of the 49ers who walked away from their sport because they felt it could be detrimental to their health long-term and to the health of others.

It's not that your point is hard to understand. It's that your point is bad.

The issue (and the reason the NHL is being sued) is because they were misled as to what that risk WAS. The lawsuits allege that the NHL purposely claimed there was no link between brain trauma and long-term health effects. The NHL has repeatedly said that in the past, and said as much in their disregard of these lawsuits. If you think Textcritic is spot on about CTE and its link to brain trauma, why are you defending the NHL which is being sued specifically because it denies that link?

Players know the job is risky but how many are supposed to know a specific risk is real when league physicians tell them that risk doesn't exist? Should they just know "goddamn well"? I trust my doctor(s). Do you? If my employer says "yeah the chemical you're working with is dangerous but it doesn't cause cancer and here's the doctor we're supplying you that agrees!" and it gives me cancer a year later, I guess I was just supposed to know?

Funny you shrug it off because nobody had a problem while they were playing, I'm sure Rypien, Belak, Boogaard, and Montador are all chillin' in their graves like "I knew this was coming and it was SO worth it!"

[CalgaryFan1988]

I don't really understand what "TheAlpineOracle" is trying to argue. The NFL knows that headshots cause brain damage and have changed their rules over the past few seasons to adjust. The NHL knows the same thing.....

The Montador family is essentially stating that the NHL should have been more aware of the risks they were putting players into before they finally adjusted the rules to make things safer.

Do you not think it's the responsibility of the NHL to make their players as safe as they could have, before the rule changes came into effect?

If they changed the rules to what they are now, say 20 years ago, do you think Montador would still be alive? I have to think he would be.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

...Football definitely has more head contact that hockey, but there is still plenty of head contact in hockey as part of the regular game, and these guys heads get snapped back violently all the time by body checks.

Anyways, I'm not arguing that contact sports don't lead to CTE and other issues. It's pretty evident to me that they do. Never going to get rid of it though unless contact sports stopped being played.

But you are sure doing your damnedest to distance the proclivity for fighting in the NHL with the incidence of CTE. At which point, I am left to wonder why this is an important point of contention with you.

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

I'm saying that the risk is known, so if you play those sports professionally, I have a hard understanding how you can sue the league you willingly participated in placing the fault on them. At some point you have to sit back and say you signed up for this, especially when your own player's union is the NHL's biggest road block in making any significant changes.

Here is the introductory sentence in the article posted at the start of this thread:

Originally Posted by Rick Westhead

The family of deceased NHL player Steve Montador, who was found dead in his Toronto-area home in February at the age of 35, is suing the National Hockey League, charging the league failed to provide him with up-to-date medical information about the risk of long-term brain damage."

The reason I have continuously returned to this equivocation fallacy is because your chosen line of argument in this discussion is not relevant. I am quite certain that there are very few who do not share your disgust and frustration with players who would choose to level frivolous charges against the NHL under the circumstances that you have described, but quite frankly, I don't believe your criticisms have much to do with the actual suit that the Montadors have filed:

Originally Posted by Paul Montador

"During regular season NHL games, preseason NHL games, NHL practices and morning skates prior to NHL games, Steven Montador sustained thousands of sub-concussive brain traumas and multiple concussions, many of which were undiagnosed and/or undocumented. The league induced him into continuing to play, and fight, in NHL games and practices.

"The NHL continues to ignore the lasting problems caused by multiple head traumas suffered by its players. Tragedies like that of my son Steven will continue until the problem is addressed. The NHL knows, but denies, that years of repeated head injuries cause long-term brain problems.

"By promoting and, in fact, glorifying fighting, the NHL continues to perpetuate its message to players, coaches and fans that blows to the head should not be considered serious injuries. The NHL knew that by eliminating staged fights from their game they would decrease drug addiction and depression in the men it enlisted in the barbaric role."

This is PRECISELY the issue, and it is really disingenuous for you to stage the discussion differently. The statements made by the plaintiff pretty clearly indicate that this is not just about players enduring risks. The report is actually quite specific about the unacceptable risk posed by the NHL's implicit tolerance and passive enablement of a culture of fighting, and their willful decision to ignore what has developed into a very serious problem.

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Through research. Based on the ongoing research to this point in time all the available evidence suggests that hockey players who suffer serious head trauma from hockey plays that effectively end their careers are not nearly as at risk as those who regularly participate in fights. .......history of fighting begins to spike, it seems that fighting is what is presenting the highest level of danger here.

You keep stating this. Please show one confirmed study that proves this, not your opinion or what you think but one scientific study. You won't because you can't. Talking the loudest on the subject does not make your point more true. Why are all the majority of people with CTE from football as they don't allow fighting.

The lawsuit filed says " Montador's family sues NHL. Claims fighting leads to depression & addiciton". This will be tough to prove. How about he didn't know what to do with his life and had no money left and was depressed over that?

And again I will circle back the family blaming the league for not giving him up to date information about the long term effects of brain injuries. Why isn't Montador, the NHLPA or even his family having the discussion about KNOWN facts since he entered the league. There is only so much that a person can claim "I didn't know the risks of what I was doing". He had been fighting for over 400 games in junior and the AHL before he ever played in the NHL.

[ThisIsAnOutrage]

Let’s humanize the issues a bit here.

The lawsuit is being brought by Montador’s parents, not him. The idea that “he knew the risks” doesn’t squarely apply; “he” is dead. The grieving family has acted on their son’s death. The lawsuit is not ridiculous or a technicality, it’s human. Montador was human, as are all the players that have ever been in the NHL. And on the others side, the NHL knew the risks too, not necessarily the precise risks of multiple head traumas, CTE, or repeated concussions, but the risk of being sued. A business dealing with enough people, for enough time, will eventually sue and be sued rightly or wrongly, because it’s all run by people in the end, from top to bottom. Pieces of paper establishing leagues, teams, unions, pa’s and corporations make no decisions.

The law and lawsuits are there to solve people-created issues when the people involved cannot do so among themselves. That we allow and want physical play in hockey that causes such injury is the people-created problem we need to solve. The league is the only body that has power to make sweeping changes but hasn’t, so there is a lawsuit that may result in change toward that goal, or not.

The ideal outcome is that we get both: physical hockey and no trauma. If we can’t get it, we have to settle for deciding where to draw the line, likely to the full satisfaction of no one.

On where the line is? My 2c is fighting as it currently exists in the NHL. It’s not really comparable to boxing or MMA at all. In those sports you have set dates, times, places, tight weight classes, training time, and most importantly a sanctioning body; if you’re not fit to fight, you can’t fight. On par with fighting in terms of what needs to change I would put any hit to the head. I think of a guy like Gaudreau: fantastic player, much shorter than the league average. His head is regularly at shoulder or elbow height. I think hits to the head should be enforced the same as high-sticking. It doesn’t matter if a player meant to or not there’s a positive obligation on the player to avoid hitting another player in the head at all times. Any Flames fans feel like it’s okay if Gaudreau winds up like Montador because he “knew the risks”?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Beatle17

You keep stating this. Please show one confirmed study that proves this, not your opinion or what you think but one scientific study. You won't because you can't. Talking the loudest on the subject does not make your point more true. Why are all the majority of people with CTE from football as they don't allow fighting.

Are you serious? This has already been covered in abundance. Of course the highest number of incidence of CTE occurs among football players, who endure an extremely high level of head trauma. Why are incidents lower among hockey players? Because they are not constantly colliding head first into one another. What do nearly all confirmed diagnoses of advanced CTE among hockey players have in common? A high incidence of fighting.

To date, Rick Martin is the only former NHL player confirmed to have suffered CTE who was not a known enforcer. This list includes Bob Probert, Derek Boogaard, Reggie Fleming, Rick Rypien, and Wade Belak. The point I am making is a very simple one as follows: Habitual fighting demonstrably increases the risk of developing CTE, which is sustained from suffering repeated head trauma. There is a very strong circumstantial link between fighting in hockey and the incidence of CTE. Would you contest this last statement?

Originally Posted by Beatle17

The lawsuit filed says " Montador's family sues NHL. Claims fighting leads to depression & addiciton". This will be tough to prove. How about he didn't know what to do with his life and had no money left and was depressed over that?

I concede that is possible, but if you read a more detailed description of the suit, you will see that the complaint very clearly indicates that there is a documented pattern of behaviour that can be linked to CTE:

Originally Posted by Chicago Sun-Times

"The suit claims that Montador experienced significant memory loss, sleep loss, pain, and behavioral changes — eventually slipping into substance abuse — as a result of the chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) that developed after 69 fights, 15 concussions, and 'thousands of sub-concussive brain traumas' during his 571-game NHL career."

It seems to me that the claimants have a documented case that goes well beyond clinical depression. Whether or not they can make it remains to be seen, but it certainly appears to be grounded in more than the hearsay that you have implied.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Beatle17

And again I will circle back the family blaming the league for not giving him up to date information about the long term effects of brain injuries. Why isn't Montador, the NHLPA or even his family having the discussion about KNOWN facts since he entered the league. There is only so much that a person can claim "I didn't know the risks of what I was doing". He had been fighting for over 400 games in junior and the AHL before he ever played in the NHL.

What known facts are those? And further to the point, as PepsiFree quite clearly noted, the Montadors' complaint is grounded in the claim that Montador was receiving bad information from League employed medical experts who conveyed to him the false impression that he was free of danger. Are you suggesting that Montador is culpable to ensure that the advice he is receiving from professionals is accurate? I would think that the NHL and the NHLPA in this instance bears the brunt of the responsibility to ensure that he is receiving the best advice.

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

What known facts are those? And further to the point, as PepsiFree quite clearly noted, the Montadors' complaint is grounded in the claim that Montador was receiving bad information from League employed medical experts who conveyed to him the false impression that he was free of danger. Are you suggesting that Montador is culpable to ensure that the advice he is receiving from professionals is accurate? I would think that the NHL and the NHLPA in this instance bears the brunt of the responsibility to ensure that he is receiving the best advice.

Thanks for answering. So no known studies or facts, just what the family claims.

[Beatle17]

Here is a link for everyone to peruse at their convenience.

http://mddirect.org/tag/chronic-trau...ncephalopathy/

The doctor running the clinic can not make a direct connection YET.