PWC Injury Blog

On Grey’s Anatomy, Season 18 Episode 3, (entitled “Hotter than Hell”), the medical team at Seattle’s fictitious Grey Sloan Memorial Hospital performed emergency surgery to repair the perforated rectum of a young lady rushed to the hospital after a jet ski accident. The paramedic relaying the patient’s condition to ER staff upon arrival diagnosed her as having sustained a “Hydrostatic Pelvic Injury” (a/k/a “PWC Orifice Injury” or “Jet Ski Rectal Injury”). “Water plowed up and cut through her entire pelvic region,” he said. “When she fell off a jet ski or was blasted off.” For a short clip of the scene, click here.

Why write about this you ask? What’s the significance of a fictitious patient being treated by fictitious doctors in a fictitious hospital? I’ll tell you why. Because although Grey’s Anatomy is founded in fiction,  there is nothing fictitious about Hydrostatic Pelvic Injuries. In fact, I personally know dozens of individuals (both women and men) that can tell you firsthand, that the injuries suffered by the young lady in the show are as real as the sky is blue.

Other than the nature and mechanism of their injuries, the individuals I speak of have (at least) one other thing in common: none of them had any idea that this type of life-threatening injury could result from something as common and seemingly harmless as slipping off the back of a personal watercraft. But the unfortunate and unknown reality is, it’s the equivalent of being blasted between the legs with a firehose.

PWC manufacturers, Yamaha, Kawasaki and Bombardier, are quite aware of the nature, mechanism and severity of Jet Ski Rectal Injuries, as well as the fact that such injuries have been occurring on their products for over thirty years. But despite this knowledge, and despite the mountain of evidence establishing the existence of safer alternative designs which would substantially reduce (if not entirely eliminate) the risk of Hydrostatic Pelvic Injuries (including PWC manufacturer owned patents of modified seat designs and handholds with the stated purpose of reducing the risk of rearward ejections), Yamaha, Kawasaki and Bombardier have collectively chosen to violate core safety engineering principles by attempting to warn their way out of a design defect.  Laughery, Kenneth et al. “The Safety Hierarchy and Its Role in Safety Decisions.” www.safetyhumanfactors.org.

And so the question remains:  How many more people have to be maimed or killed for these personal watercraft manufacturers to finally acknowledge that there’s a problem?

On June 20, 2023, 29-year-old Brandi B. of Durant, Oklahoma sustained debilitating, hydrostatic orifice injuries when she fell off the back of a 2019 BRP Sea-Doo RXT 230 and came into contact with the blast of water emanating from the watercraft’s jet propulsion system.

Shortly after the accident, which occurred on Lake Texoma in Bryan County, Oklahoma, Brandi was rushed to a nearby emergency room for life-saving medical intervention. The damage to her rectum and colon was so severe that she was forced to undergo the surgical implantation of a colostomy bag. Like all previous orifice injury clients, Brandi had no idea that this type of life threatening/altering injury could result from something as common and seemingly harmless as slipping off the back of a personal watercraft.

BRP has been sued dozens of times over the past three decades by women (and men) that, like Brandi, sustained severe internal orifice injuries upon falling off the back of BRP manufactured PWCs. So not only is BRP well aware of the nature, mechanism and severity of PWC orifice injuries, but it is also aware of the fact that such injuries have continued to occur on its products for over thirty years (and, not surprisingly, with increased frequency as increasingly more powerful machines are manufactured and released into the market). Likewise, there is a mountain of evidence establishing BRP’s knowledge of the existence of safer alternative designs which would prevent injuries such as those sustained by Brandi, including a raised seatback with more lumbar support, BRP owned patents of modified seat designs and handholds (with the stated purpose of reducing the risk of rearward ejections), as well as the late BRP engineer Sam Spade’s sketches/drawings of a pivoting seatback.

Brandi is being represented by Mazzola Law Firm, PLLC and Edwards & Patterson Law. The case, styled Brandi B. v. Bombardier Recreational Products, Inc., will be filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma.

Those interested in following the Brandi B. v. BRP, Inc. matter (or any matter referenced on this website) can check back for blog updates documenting case developments or simply subscribe to the RSS feed.

On August 14, 2021, Elizabeth B. of Endicott, New York was riding as a passenger on a 2021 Kawasaki Jet Ski Ultra 310LX when she fell off the back of the watercraft and sustained massive, hydrostatic injuries to her vagina, rectum, colon and ovaries. Her injuries were so severe that she was forced to undergo the surgical implantation of a colostomy bag. The accident occurred in Long Island in a canal near Jones Beach.

Kawasaki is well aware of the risk of orifice injuries as it has been sued dozens of times (over the past three decades) by women that, like Elizabeth, sustained severe colorectal injuries upon falling off the back of Kawasaki manufactured PWCs. So not only is Kawasaki well aware of the nature, mechanism and severity of PWC orifice injuries, but it is also aware of the fact that such injuries have continued to occur on its products for over thirty years (and, not surprisingly, with increased frequency as increasingly more powerful machines are manufactured and released into the market). Likewise, there is a mountain of evidence establishing Kawasaki’s knowledge of the existence of safer alternative designs which would prevent injuries such as those sustained by Elizabeth,  including a raised seatback with more lumbar support, and Kawasaki owned patents of modified seat designs and handholds (with the stated purpose of reducing the risk of rearward ejections). Despite its knowledge of such alternative designs, Kawasaki has chosen to violate core safety engineering principles by trying to warn its way out of a design defect.  Laughery, Kenneth et al. “The Safety Hierarchy and Its Role in Safety Decisions.” www.safetyhumanfactors.org.

Elizabeth is being represented by Mazzola Law Firm, PLLC and Ronemus Vilensky, LLP. The case, styled Elizabeth B. v. Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Ltd. et al, will be filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

Those interested in following the Elizabeth B. v. Kawasaki matter (or any matter referenced on this website) can check back for blog updates documenting case developments or simply subscribe to the RSS feed.

On March 26, 2023, Paige V. of Spring, Texas was riding as a passenger on a 2017 Yamaha Waverunner VX Deluxe when she fell off the back of the watercraft and sustained massive, hydrostatic injuries to her rectum and colon. The damage to her intestines was so severe that she was forced to undergo the surgical implantation of a colostomy bag. 

Yamaha is well aware of the risk of orifice injuries as it has been sued dozens of times (dating back to 1991) by women that, like Paige, sustained severe colorectal injuries upon falling off the back of Yamaha manufactured PWCs. So not only is Yamaha well aware of the nature, mechanism and severity of PWC orifice injuries, but it is also aware of the fact that such injuries have continued to occur on its products for over thirty years (and, not surprisingly, with increased frequency as increasingly more powerful machines are manufactured and released into the market). Likewise, there is a mountain of evidence establishing Yamaha’s knowledge of the existence of safer alternative designs which would prevent injuries such as those sustained by Paige,  including a raised seatback with more lumbar support, and Yamaha owned patents of modified seat designs and handholds (with the stated purpose of reducing the risk of rearward ejections). Despite its knowledge of such alternative designs, Yamaha has chosen to violate core safety engineering principles by trying to warn its way out of a design defect.  Laughery, Kenneth et al. “The Safety Hierarchy and Its Role in Safety Decisions.” www.safetyhumanfactors.org.

Paige is being represented by Mazzola Law Firm, PLLC. The case, styled Paige V. v. Yamaha Motor Corporation, will be filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Lufkin Division.

Those interested in following the Paige V. v. Yamaha Motor Corporation matter (or any matter referenced on this website) can check back for blog updates documenting case developments or simply subscribe to the RSS feed.

On July 16, 2022, Robin F. of DeForest, Wisconsin sustained debilitating, hydrostatic orifice injuries when she fell off the back of a Bombardier Sea-Doo and came into contact with the blast of water emanating from the watercraft’s jet propulsion system.

Shortly after the accident, which occurred on Lake Wisconsin in Sauk County, Wisconsin, Robin was rushed to a nearby emergency room for life-saving medical intervention. The damage to her rectum and colon was so severe that she was forced to undergo the surgical implantation of a colostomy bag. Like all previous orifice injury clients, Robin had no idea that this type of life threatening/altering injury could result from something as common and seemingly harmless as slipping off the back of a personal watercraft.

BRP has been sued dozens of times over the past three decades by women (and men) that, like Robin, sustained severe internal orifice injuries upon falling off the back of BRP manufactured PWCs. So not only is BRP well aware of the nature, mechanism and severity of PWC orifice injuries, but it is also aware of the fact that such injuries have continued to occur on its products for over thirty years (and, not surprisingly, with increased frequency as increasingly more powerful machines are manufactured and released into the market). Likewise, there is a mountain of evidence establishing BRP’s knowledge of the existence of safer alternative designs which would prevent injuries such as those sustained by Robin,  including a raised seatback with more lumbar support, BRP owned patents of modified seat designs and handholds (with the stated purpose of reducing the risk of rearward ejections), as well as the late BRP engineer Sam Spade’s sketches/drawings of a pivoting seatback.

Robin is being represented by Mazzola Law Firm, PLLC. The case, styled Robin F. v. Bombardier Recreational Products, Inc., was filed on May 18, 2023 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin.

Those interested in following the Robin F. v. BRP, Inc. matter (or any matter referenced on this website) can check back for blog updates documenting case developments or simply subscribe to the RSS feed.

On July 18, 2021, 21-year-old Chella P. of Cedar Grove, New Jersey sustained severe vaginal and rectal injuries when she fell off the back of a 2021 BRP Sea-Doo GTX and landed in the path of the high-pressure blast of water emanating from the PWC’s jet propulsion system. Immediately after falling off the back of the PWC, Chella was transported via ambulance to a nearby hospital and then airlifted to Robert Wood Johnson Hospital where she underwent life-saving medical intervention, including the surgical implantation of a colostomy bag.

BRP has been sued dozens of times over the past three decades by women (and men) that, like Chella, sustained severe internal orifice injuries upon falling off the back of BRP manufactured PWCs. So not only is BRP well aware of the nature, mechanism and severity of PWC orifice injuries, but it is also aware of the fact that such injuries have continued to occur on its products for over thirty years (and, not surprisingly, with increased frequency as increasingly more powerful machines are manufactured and released into the market). Likewise, there is a mountain of evidence establishing BRP’s knowledge of the existence of safer alternative designs which would prevent injuries such as those sustained by Chella, including a raised seatback with more lumbar support, BRP owned patents of modified seat designs and handholds (with the stated purpose of reducing the risk of rearward ejections), as well as the late BRP engineer Sam Spade’s sketches/drawings of a pivoting seatback.

Chella is being represented by Mazzola Law Firm, PLLC and Ronemus Vilensky, LLP. The case, styled Chella P. v. Bombardier Recreational Products, Inc., will be filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Trenton Division.

Those interested in following the Chella P. v. BRP, Inc. matter (or any matter referenced on this website) can check back for blog updates documenting case developments or simply subscribe to the RSS feed.

On July 23, 2022, 22-year-old Alivia W. of Campbellsport, Wisconsin sustained massive, internal orifice injuries when she was ejected off the back of a 2013 BRP Sea-Doo RXT. She was immediately rushed to a nearby emergency room for life-saving surgical intervention including the surgical implantation of a colostomy bag. The accident occurred on Silver Lake in Waushara County, Wisconsin.

Alivia W. is being represented by Mazzola Law Firm, PLLC. The case, styled Alivia W. v. Bombardier Recreational Products, Inc., et al, was filed in Waushara County, Wisconsin on April 6, 2023.

Those interested in following the Alivia W. v. BRP, Inc. et al matter (or any matter referenced on this website) can check back for blog updates documenting case developments or simply subscribe to the RSS feed.

 

On Grey’s Anatomy, Season 18 Episode 3, (entitled “Hotter than Hell”), the medical team at Seattle’s fictitious Grey Sloan Memorial Hospital performed emergency surgery to repair the perforated rectum of a young lady rushed to the hospital after a jet ski accident. The paramedic relaying the patient’s condition to ER staff upon arrival diagnosed her as having sustained a “Hydrostatic Pelvic Injury” (a/k/a “PWC Orifice Injury” or “Jet Ski Accident Rectal Injury“). “Water plowed up and cut through her entire pelvic region,” he said. “When she fell off a jet ski or was blasted off.” For a short clip of the scene, click here.

Why write about this you ask? What’s the significance of a fictitious patient being treated by fictitious doctors in a fictitious hospital? I’ll tell you why. Because although Grey’s Anatomy is founded in fiction,  there is nothing fictitious about Hydrostatic Pelvic Injuries. In fact, I personally know dozens of individuals (both women and men) that can tell you firsthand, that the injuries suffered by the young lady in the show are as real as the sky is blue.

In addition to the nature and mechanism of their injuries, the individuals I speak of have (at least) one other thing in common: none of them had any idea that this type of life-threatening injury could result from something as common and seemingly harmless as slipping off the back of a personal watercraft. But the unfortunate and unknown reality is, it’s the equivalent of being blasted between the legs with a firehose.

PWC manufacturers, Yamaha, Kawasaki and Bombardier, are quite aware of the nature, mechanism and severity of Jet Ski Rectal Injuries, as well as the fact that such injuries have been occurring on their products for over thirty years. But despite this knowledge, and despite the mountain of evidence establishing the existence of safer alternative designs which would substantially reduce (if not entirely eliminate) the risk of Hydrostatic Pelvic Injuries (including PWC manufacturer owned patents of modified seat designs and handholds with the stated purpose of reducing the risk of rearward ejections), Yamaha, Kawasaki and Bombardier have collectively chosen to violate core safety engineering principles by attempting to warn their way out of a design defect.  Laughery, Kenneth et al. “The Safety Hierarchy and Its Role in Safety Decisions.” www.safetyhumanfactors.org.

And so the question remains:  How many more people have to be maimed or killed for these personal watercraft manufacturers to finally acknowledge that there’s a problem?

On July 11, 2020, a minor from King William, Virginia sustained massive, internal orifice injuries when she fell off the back of a personal watercraft and came into contact with the blast of water emanating from the watercraft’s jet thrust propulsion system. At the time of the accident, 17-year-old Danielle Varner was riding as the second passenger on a 2020 Yamaha Waverunner VX Cruiser HO.

Shortly after the accident, which occurred on the Rappahannock River in Richmond County, Virginia, Danielle was rushed to a nearby emergency room for life-saving medical intervention. The water intrusion into her lower body orifices caused massive, mutilating injuries to her rectum and colon and nerve damage in her left leg. The damage to her rectum and colon was so severe that she was forced to undergo the surgical implantation of a colostomy bag. Not unlike other orifice injury accidents, neither Danielle—nor her friend who was driving at the time of the incident—had any idea that this type of life-threatening injury could result from something as common and seemingly harmless as slipping off the back of a personal watercraft. 

Yamaha is well aware of the risk of orifice injuries, as it has been sued dozens of times for orifice related injuries, dating back to 1991. Throughout this time, Yamaha has also been well aware of the fact that safer alternative designs exist that would prevent injuries such as those sustained by Danielle from occurring. Despite its knowledge of such alternative designs (which include a raised seatback/backrest, properly designed handholds and properly designed seat straps), Yamaha has chosen to violate core safety engineering principles by trying to warn its way out of a design defect.  Laughery, Kenneth et al. “The Safety Hierarchy and Its Role in Safety Decisions.” www.safetyhumanfactors.org.

Ms. Varner is being represented by Mazzola Law Firm, PLLC. The case, styled Varner v. Yamaha Motor Co., Ltd. et al, was filed in the Eastern District of Virginia on May 4, 2021.

Those interested in following the Varner v. Yamaha matter (or any matter referenced on this website) can check back for blog updates documenting case developments or simply subscribe to the RSS feed.

On June 27, 2020, a 14-year-old young lady from northwest Iowa sustained massive, internal orifice injuries when she fell off the back of a Sea-Doo personal watercraft and came into contact with the blast of water emanating from the watercraft’s jet thrust propulsion system. At the time of the accident, SVD was riding as the rearmost passenger on her uncle’s 2007 Bombardier Sea-Doo RXT. 

Shortly after the accident, which occurred on Lake Okoboji in Northwest Iowa, SVD was rushed to a nearby emergency room for life-saving medical intervention. The damage to her colon was so severe that she was forced to undergo the surgical implantation of a colsotomy bag.

Bombardier Recreational Products (BRP) has been sued dozens of times over the past three decades by women that, like SVD, sustained severe internal orifice injuries upon falling off the back of BRP manufactured PWCs. So not only is BRP well aware of the nature, mechanism and severity of PWC orifice injuries, but it is also aware of the fact that such injuries have continued to occur on its products for over thirty years (and, not surprisingly, with increased frequency as increasingly more powerful machines are manufactured and released into the market). Likewise, there is a mountain of evidence establishing BRP’s knowledge of the existence of safer alternative designs which would prevent injuries such as those sustained by SVD from occurring, including (but not limited to) BRP owned patents of modified seat designs and handholds with the stated purpose of reducing the risk of rearward ejections.

Despite this knowledge, BRP has chosen to violate core safety engineering principles by trying to warn its way out of a design defect.  Laughery, Kenneth et al. “The Safety Hierarchy and Its Role in Safety Decisions.” www.safetyhumanfactors.org.

SVD is being represented by Mazzola Law Firm, PLLC. The case, styled SVD v. BRP, Inc., was filed in Dickinson County, Iowa on October 14, 2020.

Those interested in following the SVD v. BRP matter (or any matter referenced on this website) can check back for blog updates documenting case developments or simply subscribe to the RSS feed.