The capabilities and human rights of high performance athletes

Abstract

High performance athletes participate and function in sports systems where exploitative behaviours may become manifest. These behaviours potentially violate an individual athlete’s human rights. Using the Capability Approach first outlined by Amartya Sen the paper details how a more precise analysis of human rights, in the context of high performance sport, may be achieved. Using in-depth narrative accounts from high performance athletes, data illustrate how athlete maltreatment is related to individual capabilities and functionings: the loss of individual freedoms infringes accepted notions of human rights. The implications for practice concern how human rights may be protected within and for systems of high performance production.

Navigating the Ethically Complex and Controversial World of College Athletics: A Humanistic Leadership Approach to Student Athlete Well-Being

“…Temper’s workplace abuse scale was used to measure self-reported abuse for student athletes because the criteria that define the relationship between organizations and employees are very much aligned to the relationship between student athletes and their coaches (Tepper, 2015 ). Given the number of recently reported instances of student athlete abuse featured in the media (Davis, 2020 ; Dodgson, 2020 ; Evans, et al, 2018 ; Greene, 2021 ; Myerberg, 2021 ; Vainisi, 2016 ; Williams, 2019 ) and studied in current sports research (Adams & Kavanagh, 2020 ; Kavanagh et al, 2020 ; Kerr & Kerr, 2020 ; Lopez et al, 2020 ; McMahon & McGannon, 2020 ; Nite & Nauright, 2020 ; Roberts et al, 2020 ), the problem appears to continue.…”

Adding experiential layers to the transnational-athlete concept: A narrative review of real-world heterogeneous mobility experiences

“…We are concerned that these restrictions may have performance, psychological (e.g., on perceived identity, autonomy, competence, and relatedness), and even athletes' rights implications. In this regard, recent research (e.g., Adams & Kavanagh, 2018) indicates that the current nation-aligned structure allows national governing bodies (NGB) to exert undue influence on athletes with Adams and Kavanagh commenting that high performance athletes are often vulnerable to maltreatment and exploitation because they must work with the NGB in order to earn selection for the OG. With this requirement, forced participation, limited opportunities for decision making, restricted freedom of expression, and obstruction of due process constituted real-world examples from elite athletes themselves of potentially deliberate restrictions of their freedoms and, in turn, their individual human rights and well-being by NGBs (Adams & Kavanagh, 2018).…”

“…In this regard, recent research (e.g., Adams & Kavanagh, 2018) indicates that the current nation-aligned structure allows national governing bodies (NGB) to exert undue influence on athletes with Adams and Kavanagh commenting that high performance athletes are often vulnerable to maltreatment and exploitation because they must work with the NGB in order to earn selection for the OG. With this requirement, forced participation, limited opportunities for decision making, restricted freedom of expression, and obstruction of due process constituted real-world examples from elite athletes themselves of potentially deliberate restrictions of their freedoms and, in turn, their individual human rights and well-being by NGBs (Adams & Kavanagh, 2018). At its worst, according to Fisher and Anders (2020), the structures and practices of NGBs can facilitate and perpetuate systematic abuse and sexual exploitation of athletes who lack the power or voice to take action.…”

Navigating in the Gray Area of Coach-Athlete Relationships in Sports: Toward an In-depth Analysis of the Dynamics of Athlete Maltreatment Experiences

“…A few qualitative studies have highlighted several forms of maltreatment at the top level: apparent forced training with its deleterious physical consequences (Adams and Kavanagh, 2020 ), yelling, intentional denial of attention and support (Stirling and Kerr, 2008 ), silent treatment, belittling, scapegoating and isolating (Gervis and Dunn, 2004 ), as well as rigid weight control regimes and training/competing with injuries (Pinheiro et al, 2014 ). All these studies have pointed out the gray area of coach-athlete relationships, wherein these athletes negotiate maltreatment situations by mostly accepting them through their normalization.…”

“…All these studies have pointed out the gray area of coach-athlete relationships, wherein these athletes negotiate maltreatment situations by mostly accepting them through their normalization. Indeed, despite the negative impact of these behaviors on the interviewed athletes, they normalized them as part of training (Stirling and Kerr, 2009 ; Pinheiro et al, 2014 ; Adams and Kavanagh, 2020 ) and described strategies (Kavanagh et al, 2017 ) for coping with them. In parallel, a few sociological studies have highlighted the tendency of some athletes to train despite injuries, pain, or exhaustion; the imposition of extreme training regimens; and the negotiation of such situations by normalizing these behaviors in certain sports cultures (Hughes and Coakley, 1991 ; Kerr, 2010 ; Pike and Scott, 2015 ).…”