There was a curious story in the printed edition of the 11 October 2007 Daily InterLake on the investigation of the death of Jeffrey Bowman, the high school football player in Bigfork who died in August after his heart stopped during football practice. According to the InterLake, Bowman’s attorney asked the Bigfork School District to delay releasing the report of the investigation of the incident.
The delay was granted, which is not surprising given the school district’s legal predicament. According to news reports, Bowman was allowed to practice despite not having provided Bigfork High School with written proof that he had passed the mandatory pre-football medical examination. So, apparently, were several other players. There is no certainty that a medical examination would have found the condition that caused Bowman's death, but there also is no certainty that a physical would not have found the condition — which means the school district’s legal exposure is as wide as the universe.
Whether the report — which Bigfork Superintendent Russell Kinzer said will be made public — will answer all of the questions the public would like answered remains to be seen. The attorney who conducted the investigation, Elizabeth Kaleva, an expert in school law, is working for the school board, not the public, and is likely, I think, to produce a sparse document that answers only the absolute minimum number of questions. Moreover, human nature, an instinct for self-preservation, and possible fear of legal consequences, probably will lead the school district’s officials to “error” on the side of not airing dirty laundry.
The board also, according to the InterLake, has hired an insurance attorney, which suggests to me that there is concern that the school district mismanaged its athletic program so badly that the underwriter of the school district’s insurance may be balking at claims, if any, related to the incident. We may never know unless the issue ends up in court.
But the public needs to know the answers to these questions:
First, what role did the school’s relatively small size play in the decision of the football coach to let players suit-up and practice despite not having submitted proof that they had passed their physicals? According to a sports report in the 30 August 2007 Bigfork Eagle, “New head football coach Bruce Corbett said he hopes to turn the BHS program around, but has a small number of returning players — just nine — and a small roster as well, with a total of 23 players to do so with.” That’s hardly enough to field two full teams for a practice scrimmage. Was the coach so eager to field a team that he gambled that no harm would come from not complying with the letter of the policy on physical examinations? Was he just careless?
Second, was letting players practice prior to providing proof of having passed physicals an aberration? Or, was it a de-facto policy that had been in place for years?
Third, what administrative procedures, if any, were in place to ensure that players did not practice until they had provided proof of having passed their physicals? The responsibility to enforce the policy lies not with the players or their parents, but with the school district; with the school board, the superintendent, the principal of the high school, the athletic director, and the football coach. If satisfactory procedures were not in place, why not? If they were in place, why were they not followed? Who made what mistakes, and why?
Fourth, what role, if any, did running in the smoke play in Bowman's collapse? Certainly, there was heavy smoke in Kalispell that day (graph; graph upated 31 October 2007 with latest data published by DNRC’s air quality bureau). I suspect that there is sufficient information available to allow competent researchers to conclude whether the football practice should have been taken indoors or canceled because of the heavy forest fire smoke that was reported that evening.
Taking a football practice indoors to escape the worst of the smoke would not have been a pioneering move. According to a story, Stage II Air Alert Issued for Missoula, in the 18 August 2007 Missoulian, “Hellgate High School assistant principal Tony Gallegos pulled the football team off the practice field Friday morning shortly after the Stage II warning was issued. Missoula County Public Schools have a policy not to practice outside in a Stage II air-quality alert.” Did the Bigfork school district have a similar policy? If not, why not?
It would not surprise me to learn that the Bigfork coaching staff felt pressured to practice in the smoke thanks to an early August reminder from the Montana High School Association that at least 10 practices were required before games could be held. In a story in its 7 August 2007 issue, Coaches Wary of Air Quality, the Helena Independent Record reported “‘The legal ramifications of a waiver, which would occur because of the safety/health purposes of the practice rules, would be prohibitive,’ said MHSA Executive Director Mark Beckman.¶ He said the fall sports season cannot be lengthened because it would overlap with the start of winter sports.” Indeed, the tradition in American high school football is that come rain, snow, hell, high water, or air pollution, the game must go on: during the lethal Donora Smog of 1948, the local high school played in pollution so thick that “Sometimes, balls that were kicked or punted were lost in the haze, not to be found (Donora Smog of 1948).”
Fifth, will anyone working for the school district be disciplined or fired for his role in the incident? If not, why not?
Sixth, what is being done to ensure that in the future student athletes do not practice or play before submitting proof that they have passed their physicals?
If I were a resident of that school district, I would be seriously considering running for the school board, for it is obvious that the Bigfork school district needs some changes.