**The Urgent Need for Fair Treatment of Retired NFL Players with Parkinson's Disease**

 ATTENTION: Former NFL Players, Families, and Supporters  

Former NFL players are once again facing a critical moment in the NFL Concussion Settlement. Many will remember that the settlement previously allowed the use of "race norming," a discriminatory practice that resulted in Black players being denied compensation despite having the same cognitive test scores as White players. After retired players, families, and advocates united and gathered more than 50,000 signatures through a Change.org petition, race norming was eliminated from the settlement.
Today, players face a new challenge.

While attorneys or others who engaged in misconduct should be held accountable, innocent retired players suffering from Parkinson's disease and other neurodegenerative conditions should not be punished for the actions of others. Changes being considered could create additional barriers for legitimate claimants seeking diagnoses, benefits, and compensation they rightfully earned through years of sacrifice on the football field.

We are asking the Court to protect legitimate claims, preserve fair access to diagnoses and benefits, and ensure that retired NFL players and their families are not further harmed by reforms intended to address misconduct.  We have submitted the following letter to the Court   Please add your voice to this letter.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Dear Judge Wolson:

We are members of the NFL Players Advocacy Committee (PAC). We’re writing this letter on behalf of the players and their families. There are many signatures attached that support this letter.

We are all concerned by the recent report of Special Master David Hoffman and what it might mean for players now and in the future. We all want the Court to pursue justice, but we also want the Court to know that the persons harmed most are the players, their families, their current claims, and potential future claims. This means all players, not just the players who were represented by the five law firms. It is important to remind the Court that since the Settlement, NFL players have been confirmed to suffer from neurodegenerative diseases at a rate nearly 4 times higher than the normal population. Many members of the Settlement class are impacted by cognitive impairment, whether they currently qualify or not, and as a vulnerable class they should be looked at as victims in this matter.

This is not the first major set-back for the players based on the conduct of other people.  The first and worst was the illegal race-norming of African-American Players. It was a scheme that went on for years that led to a lawsuit against the NFL. The remedy for hundreds of players was a re-scoring of BAP and MAF exams. The re-scoring often resulted in payments to previously denied players, including payments to the estates of deceased players who could never receive future testing. This should not be minimized. The NFL advocated the scheme for years against the majority of class members and helped implement it through the Settlement.

In that context, the accusations in Special Master Hoffman’s Report, if true, are another slap in the face to the players. If true, they could inspire Special Master Hoffman and the Court to take steps to make Parkinson’s Disease far more difficult to diagnose, thereby victimizing the players even more than they already are. That would be painful and unfair to players who have the disease and receive no relief, delayed relief, or discounted relief from the Settlement. The PAC recognizes that the Special Master has recommended a whole-sale denial of every pending claim that arose from the five law firms identified in the Report. The PAC does not object to that remedy.

But the Special Master’s recommendations should allow immediate re-examination by an MAF neurologist to confirm the diagnosis without further delay. The PAC requests that for those players
whose diagnosis is confirmed, the original date of diagnosis is the date of the confirmed diagnosis
for purposes of a re-submitted claim. This will protect the players whose diagnosis is confirmed.
It will prevent further victimization of players who have the disease and bear no fault. If the MAF
neurologist is not permitted to use the original date of diagnosis, the players whose Parkinson’s is
confirmed will bear an unfair financial penalty (sometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars), even
though the diagnosis is confirmed.

The PAC respectfully requests that the Court and Special Master not permit a new system or set of criteria that makes an MAF diagnosis for Parkinson’s Disease more difficult to diagnose.  The Settlement does not contemplate this; it was never negotiated. Also, it is well-known in the medical literature that the incidence of Parkinson’s cases in the United States is rising rapidly. In fact, a new study in press has found former NFL players are 3.88 times more likely to die from Parkinson’s Disease than the general population. The PAC will provide the study when published. This should not be news to the NFL. Since 2006, the NFL has recognized within the NFL’s 88 Plan that Parkinson’s is likely caused by head impacts in NFL football. In other words, the NFL itself has recognized in the NFL 88 Plan and this Settlement that Parkinson’s is an industrial disease of football and prevalent among retired NFL players. Insulating the NFL against these claims would harm the players and their families.

The anti-fraud provisions have worked in this circumstance. The remedy that the PAC recommends is what is best for the players: mandatory and complete transparency by attorneys and MAF physicians, a requirement that likely already exists within the Settlement system. For a failure to be transparent, the Special Master can employ a range of penalties against the lawyers and MAF neurologists, such as censure, suspension, or worse. The Settlement currently requires that the MAF diagnosis is based on the MAF neurologist’s personal observation in a clinic of at least three of four Parkinson’s symptoms. The PAC does not object to these symptoms remaining in place as part of the diagnostic criteria but they should not be the only criteria or mandatory above all others. The PAC requests that the Special Master and BrownGreer survey well-credentialed MAF neurologists and outside movement disorder specialists to determine whether other clinical symptoms should be included in the list of symptoms that form the basis of Parkinson’s diagnosis criteria. Some of those other symptoms, for example, are:

•    cognitive impairment
•    mental health changes
•    facial masking (expressionless or inanimate face)
•    fatigue
•    visual or auditory hallucinations
•    dizziness or light-headedness
•    positive response to carbidopa/levodopa or other medications recognized and recommended by MAF neurologists and movement disorder experts.

The reason for this third request is that Dr. Daniel Gelb’s criteria are 27 years old. Clinical criteria and practice have developed over time. Recognizing those developments will benefit the Settlement and the players by allowing the MAF neurologists to do their work effectively based on current clinical
standards.

The PAC requests that the Court and Special Master resist any steps to prevent players and their counsel from seeking qualified neurologists outside of the MAF system to diagnose and treat Parkinson’s Disease. This is often helpful to the players and their families medically and provides clarification and confirmation of the symptoms from which the players suffer. The Special Master’s Report accuses some of the five law firms with using paid consultants, not treating clinicians, outside of the Settlement. The remedies to prevent this are already in place. All outside records (positive or negative) must be submitted with any claim filed, and they must be truthful. BrownGreer is entitled to obtain all outside treatment records. The MAF neurologist, of course, must examine the player free of any medications and observe clinical symptoms, if they exist, in his or her clinic. The MAF neurologist must not be swayed by the outside diagnosis, positive or negative, and must determine and consider the qualifications of the treating neurologist. That is required today and should suffice.

The PAC appreciates the Court’s time and attention.

Respectfully,

NFL PLAYER ADVOCACY COMMITTEE

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Please join us once again in supporting fairness, transparency, and justice for retired NFL players and their families. Together, we have made a difference before, and together we can help ensure that deserving players continue to receive the support they need.

Sign this petition to urge the Court to take decisive action and ensure fair treatment for retired players suffering from Parkinson’s disease as well as other neurodegenerative and neurocognitive disease. Together, we can make a difference in the lives of these heroes who have given us so much joy and inspiration on the field.