Journal article 596 views
Beyond Consent? Paternalism and Pediatric Doping
Journal of the Philosphy of Sport, Volume: 36, Issue: 2, Pages: 111 - 126
Swansea University Author: Michael McNamee
Full text not available from this repository: check for access using links below.
In this essay, I argue that the issue of pediatric/adolescent doping is one that merits serious philosophical attention. I consider whether an adolescent who is legally competent to consent to medical pharmacologies such as contraceptive pills ought to be allowed to consent to doping products. I fir...
|Published in:||Journal of the Philosphy of Sport|
Check full text
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
In this essay, I argue that the issue of pediatric/adolescent doping is one that merits serious philosophical attention. I consider whether an adolescent who is legally competent to consent to medical pharmacologies such as contraceptive pills ought to be allowed to consent to doping products. I first discuss issues of vulnerability and exploitation of adolescent athletes that might underwrite a soft paternalistic response. I go on to argue that the harms attendant to doping, as opposed to the regulated use of the medical profession to prescribe oral contraceptives, are of a potentially greater magnitude to the successful adolescent patient/sportsperson themselves in contrast to therelatively well known risks of contraception. I also argue that the complexity of the weighing of potential harms and benefits are such that informed consent cannot be reached by adolescents. Moreover, given the public prominence of the WADA antidoping legislation, and the general public support for them, there will necessarily be a lack of transparency in the potential consent process, which undermines any audit for the accountability of the consent process. I conclude that Gillick competence ought not, therefore, to be viewed as a precedent for pediatric or adolescent consent to doping and that the “weak” or “soft” paternalistic prevention of doping is justified.
This essay was first presented as the Distinguished Scholar award of the International Association for the Philosophy of Sport. It argues against liberalising anti doping policy and is novel in that it focuses on pedatric populations. The essay combines empirical data with ethical reflections to justify a paternalistic policy.
consent, pediatric doping, sport
College of Engineering