The ethical debate over performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) in sports has long been divided between those advocating for their tolerance and those opposing their use on ethical grounds. While sport governing bodies and public authorities have joined forces to regulate and ban PEDs, the announcement of The Enhanced Games (TEG) introduces a new 'outsiders' challenge to traditional sport organizations by openly promoting the use of PEDs in sport as a celebration of unrestricted human performance. This development shifts the debate from abstract ethical discourse to real-world experimentation, directly defying conventional conceptions of sport. Although discussions around PEDs often emphasize critical concerns such as harm, coercion, and unfairness, these perspectives, while essential, can be enriched by reflecting on deeper complexities, such as the telos of sport and the relevance of human virtues in athletic endeavours. We will also argue that the concept of the 'outsider' in the case of doping in sport and TEG can be fruitfully explored with the concept of Abjection, helping to explain some of the visceral tensions and societal feelings toward TEG.

This paper provides a critical analysis of J. S. Russell's harm-reduction approach to doping in sport, examining whether pragmatic policy reform can preserve sport's deeper moral significance. While Russell's framework offers a sophisticated alternative to failed zero-tolerance prohibition by addressing collective action problems and health risks, the authors argue that it faces a fundamental tension with his own philosophical commitments. Russell's harm-reduction stance, though practically superior to blanket bans, may inadvertently accelerate the 'efficiency ethos' he critiques - reducing sport to technological optimization rather than meaningful human striving. Drawing on Russell's Striving-Entropy-Meaning framework, the authors demonstrate that his approach operates primarily at a moral-pragmatic level (3D) rather than achieving the existential integration (4D) his broader philosophy demands. The central challenge remains: can harm reduction preserve sport's internal goods - resilience, meaningful adversity and performance virtues - once chemical or other forms of enhancement become systematically embedded, even under careful regulation? This analysis reveals a dilemma in modern elite sport between practical necessity and moral ideals, suggesting that neither prohibition nor harm reduction may adequately sustain what Russell himself identifies as sport's most valuable contributions to human flourishing.

‘Safeguarding' in sport has been a fast-growing movement, particularly in the past decade, which currently encompasses a field of study and a policy development strategy. Although it is greatly needed in all sectors of sport, the concept and application of safeguarding to anti-doping has been underexplored and under theorized. In this article, utilizing the method of critical philosophical and ethical analysis, we attempt to provide evidence regarding why the intersection between safeguarding and anti-doping is very important and requires critical analysis; moreover, we suggest that feminist bioethics reflections on vulnerability can offer unique insights into key issues related to safeguarding in sport, such as the autonomy of athletes and the concept of ‘protected persons' and, most pertinent to this research, to the concepts of athlete vulnerability and anti-doping in sport. We explore the concept of vulnerability within the context of doping and anti-doping. We examine the etymology of vulnerability, discuss contemporary theories, particularly those based on biomedical ethics and feminist theories, and apply these ideas to context of anti-doping in sport. We also address the concept of safeguarding in sport, focusing on its current definitions and applications and identify gaps in the literature where doping is not yet considered a safeguarding issue. Through discussion, we link the concept of vulnerability with safeguarding by analyzing specific anti-doping cases where athlete vulnerability can, and has, resulted in significant harm to athletes’ integrity and wellbeing. These cases are from situations with minors, and they serve as a platform to put forward an integrated approach for policy development that draws on feminist theories of vulnerability, safeguarding, and biomedical ethics principles. In the results presented in the summary and conclusions, we discuss how insights from feminist theories and biomedical ethics can contribute to more effective safeguarding policies, emphasizing the importance of prevention and education rather than just the current kind of safeguarding measures that are predominantly punitive. We conclude by advocating for the urgent implementation of comprehensive safeguarding measures that address the vulnerabilities associated with anti-doping amongst athletes at all levels. This approach should prioritize prevention, fostering a balanced system that emphasizes education and awareness; where education is not just solely related to individual agency and educating athletes, but also about educating all of the anti-doping movement stakeholders to understand the particular role they play in the circumstances that increase vulnerability so that the risks can be mitigated structurally as well. To achieve this end, it is essential to develop educational programs that not only inform athletes about the risks and consequences of doping, but also empowers them with knowledge about their rights and responsibilities within the sporting community and the responsibilities of other stakeholders within the anti-doing movement. These safeguarding programs should be designed not only to promote resilience against external pressures, but, in particular, to reduce vulnerability that is created structurally more broadly speaking in the anti-doping context.

EDITORIAL article Front. Sports Act. Living, 16 February 2024Sec. Anti-doping Sciences & Integrity in Sport Volume 6 - 2024 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2024.1378777

EDITORIAL article Front. Sports Act. Living, 11 July 2023Sec. Anti-doping Sciences & Integrity in Sport Volume 5 - 2023 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2023.1248720

In this article we explore the relationships amongst anti-doping sciences, 'abjection,' and the protection of 'women's' sport. We introduce three novel concepts: 'abjection bias,' 'abjection potential,' and 'intersectional abjection,' as tools with the potential to provide greater nuance to understanding the context for these contentious issues in contemporary sport. The debate concerning participation in women's sport-especially elite sport-of people who do not fit within traditional definition of 'women' is increasingly fraught with acrimony with anti-doping sciences often recruited as arbitrator. With access to opportunities such as participation at the Olympic Games at stake, emotions run high in arguments that typically centre on inclusion of transgender and gender diverse (TGD) athletes on the one hand and protection of the women's category on the other. While sport theorists have begun the important work of identifying the roots of these problems deep within the structure of modern sport and society itself, they have hitherto paid little attention to the philosophical underpinnings of that structure. Through the lens of feminist critical analysis, we seek, in this paper, to understand the complex role of 'abjection' in framing the current debate in sport and in related anti-doping sciences. From a clear definition of abjection as a perceived existential threat due to violation of the status quo, we introduce the new concepts of 'abjection bias,' 'abjection potential,' and 'intersectional abjection' in order to understand and explain what in common parlance we might call 'gut reaction.' By looking at the few notable previous treatments of sport abjection and highlighting the historical connections between anti-doping sciences and efforts to protect the women's category, we demonstrate that this co-development is, in part, more easily understood in the context of 'abjection.' We conclude that the clarity gained can also help to shed light on current policy decision-making in relation to the question of protecting the women's sport category.

While masters sport aligns with the holistic concept of active aging, related research has focused predominantly on the physical domain, and less is known about the psychological, cognitive, and social benefits of older adults' participation. This study examined, in combination, the perceived psychological, social, cognitive, and physical benefits of training and competing as a masters athlete, while considering age and gender differences. Forty masters athletes residing in Canada were interviewed (21 men and 19 women; 15 who were 50-64 years and 25 who were 65-79 years), representing 15 different sports. Interviews were coded both deductively and inductively, revealing several subthemes of benefits for the broader perceived psychological, social, cognitive, and physical benefits, with few but notable differences between women and men, and those younger than 65 years and those 65+ years. Our findings provide new insights into the positive experiences of active aging associated with high levels of physical activity among older adults, such as greater self-confidence, especially for women, comradery, and feeling mentally sharper, especially for the older age group.

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has led to detrimental changes in all aspects of life worldwide. As the sporting community continues to face various issues, including the postponement of the Tokyo Summer Olympic and Paralympic Games, the effects are being felt by all parties involved. In particular, there has been ongoing research investigating Olympic athletes and the unintended consequences they experience as a result of the pandemic. The repercussions are analyzed based on measures taken by nations and organizations, including the International Olympic Committee (IOC), and the effects these actions have on the health and well-being of athletes. This chapter seeks to examine the implications of the current COVID-19 pandemic on elite Olympic athletes and to identify the potential impact on fairness in general and fair play in sport at the Tokyo Games. Key emerging themes presented in the current literature include financial, physiological, psychological, and sociological concerns for athletes.

In this overview, succinct information is provided on how the recognition of the voices of athletes has developed over decades. Processes of continuity and transformation are outlined, which serve to highlight and create interest in the topics of the full papers connected with this collection. Following this preparation for ‘stepping into the topic’, a rationale is also presented regarding the order and grouping of the various studies. In essence, the sequence is based around three perspectives, namely: the lives and biographical profiles of athletes; the decision-making processes of, and for, athletes; and the formal and informal institutional representation of athletes. While the touchstone is primarily on the voices of athletes associated with Olympic-related sports, brief consideration is also given to the actions and opinions of athletes expressed in other sporting spheres. The paper concludes with a summary and acknowledgement of the institutional collaborations which have underpinned this work.

During the Russian doping scandal at the 2016 Olympic Games, athletes' voices were fighting to be heard. The response, specifically from athletes', has been widely covered by sports critics and the media. Critical literature and media perspectives on this topic generated various types of reactions internationally, but in particular, at least two different kinds of discourses can be identified surrounding the debate on the scandal. This paper aims to differentiate and analyze these two main types of discourses: discourse for international collaboration and discourse for athletes' care. The discourse on athletes' care will be presented through some key ideas from 'Ethics of Care' and feminist theory. In this paper it will be claimed that there has been a missed opportunity to distinguish reactions to the 2016 Russian doping scandal through these two discourses. The 'caring' approach identifies that the conflict needed to be resolved by asking the athletes directly, understanding their experiences and listening to their needs. The international collaboration approach, rooted in sport justice and generally conceived to be superior, with discussions on length of bans, possibility of appeals and arguments for defence, is presented as the more 'impartial' approach. Both discourses possess strengths and weaknesses and, in order to strengthen philosophical and ethical arguments on polarizing events such as doping scandals, both deserve the attention of the scientific community.

Masters athletes are a unique group of older adults whose experiences may provide valuable insights into the role of sport for successful aging. The purpose of this study was to explore whether masters athletes' social and psychological experiences vary with their time, frequency, and perceived exertion in training and competition. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 40 men and women older masters athletes, aged 50–79 years (M = 66), who were active at the competitive level across a variety of sports (e.g., volleyball, curling, rowing, dragon boating, running, swimming, and basketball) at the time of the study. Results indicate that all participants experienced social and psychological benefits from engaging in masters sport. Only the high-frequency engagement subgroup (participating five to seven times per week in training and/or competition) reported social downsides, in terms of missing time with family and friends outside of masters sport. However, some participants described the positive family support (e.g., spouse who endorses sport participation) that overrides some of the social costs. These findings have implications for realizing positive experiences with minimal engagement in masters sport, yet an apparent threshold of participation beyond which negative social consequences may be experienced. This is an important consideration for the design and promotion of sport for older adults.

ABSTRACT Recent debate by feminist scholars in philosophy of sport has been focused on the status of women’s sport as a protected category. Positions have varied significantly, from no need for a protected category anymore—to allow women’s sport to flourish and to give them a fair opportunity, given that men’s sport still dominates, just as it has in the past. It will be argued that: i) the concept of a ‘protected category’ is tied logically to the concept of fair play and has been defined and enforced through the rules in sport and generally requires some kind of certification for inclusion. These specific rules will be analyzed in detail. Having separate women’s events means that logically it must be possible to exclude, and exclusion is not a popular stance as many have argued that the onus is on inclusion from a human rights perspective. Thus, sport policy makers are truly in an intractable position. On the one hand, no qualifying athlete should have to ‘dope down’ (or ‘dope up’) to compete in the Olympic Games. On the other hand, women athletes have argued that sex equality in competitive sport is a legitimate goal and that separating athletes in competition by biological sex traits is the only way to achieve this goal. It seems criminal to ask athletes to ‘dope down’ to be able to compete in the Olympic Games, however, although a new auxiliary rule creating new sub-classification of women athletes with testosterone higher than the stipulated cut off seems logical on the face of it, these cases are statistically rare. It is concluded that the community of women athletes should have the most significant voice, as historically, the criteria for the women’s sport-protected category have been predominantly determined by men. That is not to say that men’s voices, or voices outside of the women’s sports community of practitioners, cannot be heard, but they should not be the deciding factor.

Technological advancements in wheelchairs, prosthetics and numerous other adaptive devices and practices have allowed injured or disabled athletes to compete in sport at all levels. These advancements will continue to improve athletic performance significantly both in para-sport and in Olympic sport. These biomedical and technological advancements also have the potential to change the very nature of sport itself. Those in sport management are often responsible for assessing and adapting the rules of sport to accommodate these advancements which are essential to maintaining the spirit of sport. This chapter provides background on the Paralympics and discussions on the need for rule changes pertaining to who is eligible to compete in the Paralympics should one rebuild their body – for instance, the reconstruction of a knee or elbow joint with stem cells that rejuvenate ligaments and tendons or the use of 3D printed titanium to replace bone. This chapter starts with the basic history of para-sport and the role of technology in its development. Next, the discussion moves to the rules of sport that support and maintain fairness with regard to technological advancements. This is followed by a dialogue on how technological advancements may challenge the spirit of sport with scenarios, followed by specific questions dealing with “the way forward” for managing cutting-edge technological advancements in sport. Through these questions, debate is encouraged regarding the acceptability/unacceptability of these technologies for use in para-sport.

This paper will entail a critical analysis of the relationship between sport science and ethics by analysing various forms of 'fairness' rules and policies. The relationship between science and ethics can have an impact on professional careers and competitive balance. The generation and adjudication of some of the more traditional formal rules and policies utilized to authenticate fairness, and thus support prevailing concepts of fair play, will be challenged from a philosophical and feminist perspective.

Drawing on two primary publications, I attempt to demonstrate that Morgan's analysis of fair play in the doping wars, the treatment-enhancement distinction and the use of what he has called 'emotional-psychological enhancement' lends significant support to (1) the calls for fairness and respect in anti-doping strategies (and I would add in particular for athlete's rights); (2) the calls for moral evaluation of 'psycho-doping' and its inclusion on the banned list; and (3) the calls for the consideration of the doping problem being reflective of '...a deep moral malaise' where we have mistakenly sought '...a technical solution for what is wrongly perceived to be essentially a technical problem' (Morgan 2007, 177). Further, through this analysis of Morgan's work, I add an exploration of an inversion of the 'Doctrine of Double Effect' from medical ethics for its potential application to consideration of criteria for the evaluation of both the treatment-enhancement distinction and the banned list.

In the following article, it will be argued that there are at least four clusters of arguments generally proposed to justify banning doping in sport and that Simon's contribution has been of a seminal nature to at least two of the clusters.