Mapping ethical positions with regard to a coach’s decision to select (or not) an injured athlete

Abstract

The study’s objective was to map ethical positions with regard to the way in which 219 participants (45 non-athletes, 91 amateur athletes, 28 professional athletes, 17 amateur coaches, 8 professional coaches, and 30 physiotherapists) used various informational cues (an athlete’s indispensability for the team, the importance of the competition, the opinion given by sports medicine professionals, and the injured athlete’s attitude) to judge the acceptability of a coach’s decision to select (or not) an injured athlete just before a competition. The participants specified their judgment of acceptability in 16 scenarios created by combining these information cues under two conditions (selection and non-selection). The data were analyzed using cluster analyses, analyses of variance, and chi-squared tests. We found four clusters. Not selecting an injured athlete was always judged to be acceptable. The four clusters differed in terms of the type of role in sport and the level of acceptability of selecting an injured athlete. A coach’s decision with regard to an athlete’s health may be judged differently, according to the rater’s profile. Enabling athletes to compete while injured might violate ethical principles. Coaches and medical staff should also be aware of and understand their legal responsibilities.