Ksyrup
03-30-2007, 07:53 AM
Rob Neyer has started blogging on ESPN.com (insider only) - and doing a fine job, btw - and one of his blogs yesterday about the likelihood that the Tigers are going to slump this year pointed out Kenny Rogers' "tired arm" and trip to the DL. Neyer, in passing, raised a question about injury reporting based on this comment from an article about Rogers:
"Asked what part of Rogers' arm is fatigued, Dombrowski said he couldn't say more about Rogers' injury because of new, tighter rules in baseball on disclosing information on injuries."
Neyer asked readers to enlighten him about this, and there is a small discussion about how disclosure of medical information without a person's consent is a violation of privacy laws, and that apparently, in line with this, a section of the CBA was recently added/amended which prohibits a team from commenting on injuries, only the player can do so.
I don't know if that's true or not about the CBA being amended, but if it is, this raises an interesting question about injury reporting in sports in general - is the DL a violation of privacy laws? Can teams get around this simply by placing a consent to disclosure in a player's contract? What, oh what, would the NFL do without the ability to provide Vegas with injury info each week, and how are they doing this legally now?
I assume a consent is the easiest way around this, and might be what all leagues are using to comply with the laws, and Dombrowski is skirting the issue of revealing a potentially serious (or at least more serious than "dead arm") injury to Rogers by hiding behind the privacy law excuse (which would be a pretty novel and Belichickian thing to do, wouldn't it?), but maybe not. Maybe the leagues really aren't in compliance here, and the MLB CBA provision - if it exists at all - is designed more to combat the drug testing issue than to comply with privacy laws aimed at routine player injury reporting. But I find the whole thing to be curious, in that I'd never really given it a second thought until this article. Anyone in the medical field who deals with privacy issues on a day-to-day basis care to comment?
Oh, and I found this comment from one of the respondents to Neyer's blog pretty damn funny:
"I can barely manage to get my head around the ramifications for Manny Ramirez alone. He has a certain history of taking days off for vague, dubious injuries -- and now he'll be able to do without fear of being criticized or scrutinized? That's just a midseason Dominican vacation waiting to happen. And isn't "Manny being Manny" a legitimate mental health issue in and of itself? I can't wait to see that play out. Larry Lucchino will be limited to comments like, "This is just a case of Manny being a player whose name I cannot disclose." :D
"Asked what part of Rogers' arm is fatigued, Dombrowski said he couldn't say more about Rogers' injury because of new, tighter rules in baseball on disclosing information on injuries."
Neyer asked readers to enlighten him about this, and there is a small discussion about how disclosure of medical information without a person's consent is a violation of privacy laws, and that apparently, in line with this, a section of the CBA was recently added/amended which prohibits a team from commenting on injuries, only the player can do so.
I don't know if that's true or not about the CBA being amended, but if it is, this raises an interesting question about injury reporting in sports in general - is the DL a violation of privacy laws? Can teams get around this simply by placing a consent to disclosure in a player's contract? What, oh what, would the NFL do without the ability to provide Vegas with injury info each week, and how are they doing this legally now?
I assume a consent is the easiest way around this, and might be what all leagues are using to comply with the laws, and Dombrowski is skirting the issue of revealing a potentially serious (or at least more serious than "dead arm") injury to Rogers by hiding behind the privacy law excuse (which would be a pretty novel and Belichickian thing to do, wouldn't it?), but maybe not. Maybe the leagues really aren't in compliance here, and the MLB CBA provision - if it exists at all - is designed more to combat the drug testing issue than to comply with privacy laws aimed at routine player injury reporting. But I find the whole thing to be curious, in that I'd never really given it a second thought until this article. Anyone in the medical field who deals with privacy issues on a day-to-day basis care to comment?
Oh, and I found this comment from one of the respondents to Neyer's blog pretty damn funny:
"I can barely manage to get my head around the ramifications for Manny Ramirez alone. He has a certain history of taking days off for vague, dubious injuries -- and now he'll be able to do without fear of being criticized or scrutinized? That's just a midseason Dominican vacation waiting to happen. And isn't "Manny being Manny" a legitimate mental health issue in and of itself? I can't wait to see that play out. Larry Lucchino will be limited to comments like, "This is just a case of Manny being a player whose name I cannot disclose." :D