According to this article, in recent years Special Olympics (SO) has made a rule that “ lateral (side view) neck X-rays [must] be obtained for individuals with [Down Syndrome] DS before they participate in the SO's nationwide competitive program. Further, SO has asserted that “those participants with radiologic evidence of [a spinal cord condition called Atlantoaxial Instability, also known as] AAI are banned from certain activities that may be associated with increased risk of injury to the cervical spine....”
Special Olympics is geared towards giving the opportunity for individuals to participate in athletics who normally couldn’t. We think that baring them from playing sports just because they may have a medical condition that may be dangerous in sports defeats the purpose of SO. Sports in SO are purposely modified to allow individuals with all kinds of disabilities to participate. Many individuals with Downs Syndrome have heart conditions. However, SO does not bar them from participating due to that fact alone. Why should Atlantoaxial Instability be any different? Not only are the X-ray screenings of “…unproven value in detecting patients at risk for developing spinal cord injury during sports participation” they seem to run against the core values of SO—allowing all students the opportunity to play regardless of their disability. What do you think about Atlantoaxial Instability screenings and its role in determining participation or nonparticipation in Special Olympics?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think requiring lateral X-rays and barring those with AAI is just a precautionary measure by the SO for liability reasons.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if I agree...I feel like if a condition is going to put one of these wonderful people at risk for serious injury or death, that they should not be participating in sports that put them at risk. I think that Special Olympics should consider which events would actually put a person with the condition at risk, and only ban them from that event. I don't think participating in any kind of activity to promote inclusion is right if it puts a human being at risk for injury. As much as I love the crap out of inclusion, we should not overdo it by letting people get hurt. Condition or not, diagnosis or not, people should play it safe!
ReplyDeleteI agree with Naomi, I think it is for liability reasons. It's the Special Olympics...they honestly want anyone who can participate to do so, however, they also don't want to harm someone because of a condition.
ReplyDeleteI think it's smart, although I could see how it might be controversial.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis idea seems to parallel the post we had about full inclusion. What we should be aiming to do is allow individuals to compete in activities to the point that it's fulfilling for them. When people begin putting their lives at risk for the sake of the game, will we be sacrificing good health for the sake of competition and entertainment?
ReplyDeleteI can understand why there is controversy over this issue, but personally I agree with Naomi. I think that it is for liability reasons and that they are covering their buts. I also agree with Britany in that some of these people with disabilities probably shouldn’t be participating in sports because it could put them at risk. I don’t think participating in an activity such as the Special Olympics is worth risking ones life. But this all depends on the person. Each person is different. But I understand why the Special Olympics want to do screening. They want to make sure that they don’t put anyone in risk for injury. When doing any activity people should be cautious, especially those with disabilities that make them more prone to injuries.
ReplyDeleteThis comment is from Suzanne, somehow I am logged in as my husband--I am an advocate of any type of physical activity. I believe everyone, no matter if they have a disability or not, should somehow find a way to be active. Therefore if a person is of sound mind even if not of sound mind, and they have a supportive guardian, a release should be signed in order to participate. I haven’t had a chance to look into the Special Olympics requirements yet I assume the students are indeed required to have a waiver signed in order to participate.
ReplyDeleteDo I think certain kids should be banned from participation in a particular sport? Certainly not! They should make such decisions including the Dr. student and guardian. If cleared, go for it! Just remember this should be a decision involving the individual because each individual is different.
I can understand why some people think that this test and the barring of some children from the strenuous activities would go against what the Special Olympics is trying to do, but from what I read AAI is a serious condition and nothing is worth the albeit rare possibility that a child will be harmed doing the Special Olympics. And they did not say that is the child tested positive for this that they were banned from the Special Olympics, they only said the more strenuous activities.
ReplyDeleteIt's a liability that the SO cannot afford being a volunteer and donation based program. And I see no reason to risk childrens lives.
I agree with many above that this is for both liability reasons, and also safety reasons for the individual. I do not think that the person should be participating in a sport or activity which has good rish to harm them. Yes, we want all to be able to participate and have a good experience but there has to be some limit. I think that in these situations, the Special Olympics committee should try to figure out some activity for them to participate in if they wish. Some activity which will not be harmful to the individual.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Suzanne. It is amazing what participating in the Special Olympics can do for someone. They are actually participating in something for fun and getting involved. I think it is critical to interact with others and belong to something. There is no better feeling than when you feel like you belong and have accomplished something or that someone needs you. I think SO can do that for a child with disabilities. However, it is important to think of safety. SO should definitely have waivers for them to sign and warn people of the potential risks. The decision to participate should include a doctor, the potential participant and the legal guardians. It is a big decision, and like everything else in this program it is individualized.
ReplyDeleteoh also, just to add. we put ourselves at risk. whether it be sky diving or just driving in the snow. yes i know this is different than Special Olympics, but it is the same general concept. We put ourselves at risk, because we have the right to. I dont think they should be denied to participate if they are aware of the risks and still decide to participate.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that the Special Olympics program is beneficial to all individuals with special needs. Unfortunately, there are risks that come from playing sports, so I can understand why the SO program is requiring individuals with Down syndrome to get a screening before they can join the program. Yes, it is sad that the individual may not be able to participate in SO, but safety does need to come first and be considered.
ReplyDeleteI think that safety is really important. If those with AAI are put at risk by certain activities I think that it is necessary to screen them and possibly not allow them to participate in the SO.
ReplyDeleteI believe it's important to keep safety in mind; however I don't think that people should be banned- I think it really depends on the individual, as has been stated. I liked what Kelli said about how we put ourselves at risk. I think it should be up to the individual. If it really was a dangerous situation, then I would say they should still participate- just not in every activity; or maybe they require certain modifications. Like I said- I think safety is definetly important and I don't want to totally disregard it- but I think with this specific condition I would need more information to really make a decision.
ReplyDeleteI agree with most of you that this is a liability issue. But, I really don't believe that anyone should risk being so seriously injured when playing sports. Even those who don't qualify for the special Olympics have to take precautions if the sport is going to injure them seriously. I also agree with Camille, however, and believe that they should be given a chance to participate in some of the sports that will be less dangerous for them to participate in. I do think that the rules should be modified to allow them to participate in at least some of the sports, instead of excluding them altogether.
ReplyDeleteSpecial Olympics are meant to provide opportunities to individuals with disabilities that they cannot find anywhere else. SO is to help individuals interact with others and learn to socialize. So many individuals with disabilities look forward to SO all year long. I do not think that anyone should have the right to say who can and cannot participate in the SO. That is not cool at all. However, I think that all the participants and responsible parties should be made aware of certain risks that they might have if they choose to participate. I really like what Kelli said. We all as human beings put ourselves at risk every day, but it is a part of life and gives us experiences that we do not want to live without. I think that every individual should be able to choose if he/she would like or not like to participate in SO. It is there own decision with their responsible parties consent.
ReplyDeleteI do not think that the Special Olympics are going against everything they are trying to do by banning people with AAI from participating in certain sports. I think it is smart that they are trying to protect those individuals with AAI. They still allow these individuals to participate in some of the events at the Special Olympics just not all of them, particularly those that are more strenuous. I am glad that although the Special Olympics are focused on letting individuals with disabilities participate in activities they do not forget about the safety of these individuals.
ReplyDeleteWhen I volunteered at Special Olympics this last summer, there were soooo many cool activities going on besides the sports. My husband and I were in charge of the arts and crafts booth. It was a blast! They also had kareoke and dancing and a huge dump bucket. I think that it is important to screen people with this possible condition so that they are kept safe. We don't want anyone to get hurt, we want them to have fun and make friends! I think it is a good idea, especially since they can participate in all of the other activities. We want safety at all costs
ReplyDeleteI think that the purpose of the SO should be to allow the indviduals with disabilities the opportunity to participate in activities they might not otherwise have a chance to do. The AAI screening, in my opinion, should be required so that the participants and their families know of the possible risks, however, I do not think the SO should necessarily prevent the individuals from participating if they choose otherwise. I think the idea behind the rule is well intentioned but I feel that if the screening was required and they just had the participants sign a waiver that would be a better way of protecting the health and rights of the participants.
ReplyDeleteSo i have mixed feelings about all of this. I feel that the fac that they are requiring lateral X-rays and barring those with AAI is just being used a precaution by the SO for liability reasons. But at the same time the Special Olympics are for those with disabiities. These individual dont get to do much and this is there one time to shine and we want to take that away from them for something they can't control, i dont like that. THey already have so many set back's in life and i dont think it's fair to have another one. I think that there should be a relese form that the parents fill out that they understand the risk but there free agency shouldn't be taken away from them!
ReplyDeleteI understand what others are saying about this screening defeating the purpose of the Special Olympics. However, I think this is a precautionary measure that needs to be taken. First priority is to ensure that the participants in SO are safe. If they have a serious condition that would possibly cause problems if they participated in SO, this needs to be known. Also, looking at this objectively, it is a leagal issue for SO. They have to protect themselves leagally. The way they do that is by requiring screening and restircting participation to those athletes that could be seriously injured. I think that this is really a positive thing overall and support it.
ReplyDeleteI feel like this is the broken record speaking. Lots of similar feelings on this one. I can understand why there would be a desire to do pre-screenings on the part of the SO. I know we are educators in mind and heart but I dont think it would be that hard to put ourselves in the shoes of those that run SO. They are concerned for injuries, death, and the effect on other athletes. There is liability to look at. We all know law suits are just waiting to happen when it comes to people with disabilities. But looking as an educator and someone who wants to fight for the rights of those with disabilities, I feel that if some way that acccomodations could be made for those who are more severe healthwise that would be the best. But the fact is, just like in the schools sometimes full inclusion isnt always the best idea. It is such an individual case. We could never make a all inclusive statement or setting. We just dont know how to do that, and especially stear clear of liability. I can see both sides but I lean definitly to the screening.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, this article was written almost 10 years ago. Things could be different today. That said, I think that SO has the right to do what it wants. I do not agree that they should ban people with certain disabilities to participate in certain sports. I think that the individual should be the one to choose what he or she wants to do. One alternative is that SO could still require screening, then have that individual and the guardian (if relevant) sign a statement. Maybe SO has already thought of that and the decided against it, however, I think that the only restrictions for events should be the ability qualifications they require for the sport.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this post I believe that if the SO wants to be careful about the legal conditions its athletes compete on, then they should provide a waiver, which they probably already do, which stipulates that the athletes cannot hold SO responsible for any harm or accident occuring during the games. With this being the special olympics then there has to be some way to make accommodations somehow.
ReplyDelete