E-Thesis 549 views 2433 downloads
Fair Equality of Opportunity: An Ethical Framework for Classification in Paralympic Sport / RICHARD PARNELL
Swansea University Author: RICHARD PARNELL
DOI (Published version): 10.23889/SUThesis.69353
Abstract
Fairness is one of the most important ethical issues in sporting competition and is a particular problem in Paralympic sport due to differences in the nature and severity of athletes’ impairments. The International Paralympic Committee (IPC) attempts to promote fairness in the structure of competiti...
| Published: |
Swansea University, Wales, UK
2025
|
|---|---|
| Institution: | Swansea University |
| Degree level: | Doctoral |
| Degree name: | Ph.D |
| Supervisor: | McNamee, M. J. |
| URI: | https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa69353 |
| Abstract: |
Fairness is one of the most important ethical issues in sporting competition and is a particular problem in Paralympic sport due to differences in the nature and severity of athletes’ impairments. The International Paralympic Committee (IPC) attempts to promote fairness in the structure of competition by grouping athletes into different classes. There are, however, many aspects of that classification system that are unfair. This thesis aims to develop an alternative ethical framework for Paralympic classification based on the principle of fair equality of opportunity. I argue that the purpose of, and rationale for Paralympic classification is not, as the IPC states, to minimise the impact of impairment on athletic performance, but rather to provide all athletes with a fair and equal opportunity to perform in meaningful competition. Loland has established the most developed ethical model for assessing fairness in sport. I propose a three-stage framework for Paralympic classification that develops Loland’s model and incorporates but distinguishes the separate equal opportunity theories of Jacobs and Roemer. I call this the Fair Equality of Opportunity 2 (‘FEO2’) model. I argue that natural differences of Paralympic athletes that cannot be controlled but have a significant effect on athletic performance should be recognised by grouping athletes into relevant classes (“Background Fairness”, “BF”). I argue that the distribution of advantage in each class should reflect differences in athletic performance based on natural intrinsic talents (i.e.relevant skills and abilities) rather than extrinsic factors such as technology (“Procedural Fairness”, “PF”). Finally, I argue that unequal treatment in the distribution of advantage between Paralympic athletes should reflect differences in performance (“Outcomes Fairness”,“OF”). I conclude that the FEO2 model is preferable to the present IPC classification system because it embeds the principle of fair equality of opportunity before, during, and after, sporting competition. |
|---|---|
| Item Description: |
A selection of content is redacted or is partially redacted from this thesis to protect sensitive and personal information. |
| Keywords: |
Fairness, Fair Equality of Opportunity, Paralympic Classification, Paralympic Sport, Loland, Jacobs, Roemer |
| College: |
Faculty of Science and Engineering |