Congress Looks Into Bias Claims in N.F.L. Concussion Settlement

The members of Congress asked for answers to their questions no later than October 2, 2020.

Last week, the N.F.L. said in a statement that the lawsuit was “entirely misguided” and that the settlement “always contemplated the use of recognized statistical techniques to account for demographic differences such as age, education and race.”

“The point of such adjustments — in contrast to the complaint’s claims — is to seek to ensure that individuals are treated fairly and compared against comparable groups.” Doctors, the league said, are not required to use any particular adjustments.

Still, the N.F.L. has appealed approved claims, arguing that doctors should have considered a player’s race when deciding whether he was eligible for a payout. For instance, the league challenged a payout to Najeh Davenport, a former running back, one of the two players who took legal action against the league last week.

But the settlement case’s special master, who rules on appeals, wrote in response to the N.F.L.’s appeal that “it is inappropriate to deny a claim solely because the clinician chose” not to use a player’s race when interpreting his test scores. The special master also cited medical experts who questioned the merits and fairness of using race when interpreting test scores.

“As using African-American-specific norms increases the rate of false negatives, there is a risk that some may be denied access to necessary benefits or compensation solely on the basis of race,” the special master wrote.

Davenport, who was joined in the lawsuit by Kevin Henry, who played eight years with the Pittsburgh Steelers, compared the use of race-based benchmarks to redlining, or the practice of denying applications of Black people seeking home loans or insurance.

Article source: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/02/sports/football/nfl-concussion-settlement-race-bias-congress.html