Dear ed...Of course OTS will delve into the helmet question. Why not be concerned with other conditions, such as snow pack quality. Was the slope icy (likely)? Why was a beginner on an icy slope? We know nothing about any other medical condition she may have had, (known or unknown). Ski patrol knew something was wrong from the get go, why else would they have stayed with her in her hotel for an hour. Last time I asked for ski patrol help I was given a plastic bag, told to fill it with snow and put it on my bruises. Why has there been no statement from the patroller or the instructor? Why do we always look at the helmet issue even before all the facts are known?
All good questions, but wearing a helmet is the one factor among all others you describe that an individual can control. Ms. Richardson was receiving a private lesson on a beginners slope. Thus, conditions to avoid -- i.e.: icy areas -- may not have been within the scope of her knowledge. All remaining factors -- e.g.: patroller and instructor statements -- are post-injury, and undoubtedly bound in legalities.
Still, as you observe, the facts are indeed yet unknown, and experiences are obviously varied.
Initial reports that I read said she fell face first. Would a helmet have protected her face? This was an unfortunate, freak accident. Reporters are saying that she developed a blood clot in between the brain and the skull, causing the brain to swell. Scary, yes, but it should not make people scared to go skiing or snowboarding.
All good questions, but wearing a helmet is the one factor among all others you describe that an individual can control. Ms. Richardson was receiving a private lesson on a beginners slope. Thus, conditions to avoid -- i.e.: icy areas -- may not have been within the scope of her knowledge. All remaining factors -- e.g.: patroller and instructor statements -- are post-injury, and undoubtedly bound in legalities.
Still, as you observe, the facts are indeed yet unknown, and experiences are obviously varied.