Skip to main content

Sports

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Encyclopedia of Global Bioethics
  • 59 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter explores the relationship between bioethics and sport ethics, which changed dramatically in the early 2000 when the genetics era generated a series of new questions about the ends of sport and how they would interface more widely with a range of bioethical principles. Focused largely on the nontherapeutic application of genetics to persons, the entry situates these debates within the context of discussions about the use of human enhancement and wider debates about transhumanism. It argues that concerns about the ethics of performance enhancement in sport have become more closely aligned with wider public health concerns, where doping should be seen as more than just a problem for elite sport. It also examines the overlap between technologies, which have further expanded the field of bioethics into such areas as disability studies, where the case of Oscar Pistorius – as the first prosthetically enabled Paralympian to compete within the Olympic Games – has been a prominent example of the overlap between biotechnology and biomechanical prosthesis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Barton-Davis, E. R., Shoturma, D. I., Musaro, A., Rosenthal, N., & Sweeney, H. L. (1998). Viral mediated expression of insulin-like growth factor I blocks the aging-related loss of skeletal muscle function. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences U S A, 95, 15603–15607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chadwick, R. F. (1987). Ethics, reproduction and genetic control. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coenen, C., Schuijff, M., Smits, M., Klassen, P., Hennen, L., Rader, M., & Wolbring, G. (2009). Human Enhancement: Study. Brussels: Science and Technology Options Assessment, European Parliament.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennis, C. (2005). Rugby team converts to give gene tests a try. Nature, 34, 260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament: Science and Technology Options Assessment. See: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/stoa/events/workshop/20090224/background_en.pdf

  • Fost, N. (1986). Banning drugs in sports: A skeptical view. Hastings Center Report, 16, 5–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, F. (2002). Our posthuman future: Consequences of the biotechnology revolution. London: Profile Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • House of Commons. (2007). Human Enhancement Technologies in Sport: Second Report of Session 2006–7 (22 February). (Science and Technology Select Committee, Ed.). The Stationary Office, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Juengst, E. T. (1998). What does enhancement mean? In E. Parens (Ed.), Enhancing human traits. Ethical and social implications (pp. 29–47). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ledley, F. D. (1994). Distinguishing genetics and eugenics on the basis of fairness. Journal of Medical Ethics, 20, 157–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCrory, P. (2001). Ethics, molecular biology, and sports medicine. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 35, 142–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, H., Marshall, R., Hemingway, H., Myerson, S., Clarkson, P., Dollery, C., & Humphries, S. E. (1998). Human gene for physical performance. Nature, 393, 221–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, W. J. (1994). In B. G. Rader & R. Roberts (Eds.), Leftist theories of sport: A critique and reconstruction. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray, T. H. (1983). The coercive power of drugs in sports. Hastings Center Report, 13, 24–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parens, E. (1998). Enhancing human traits: Ethical and social implications. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wackerhage, H., Miah, A., Harris, R. C., Montgomery, H. E., & Williams, A. G. (2009). Position stand on ‘Genetic research and testing in sport and exercise science’: A review of the issues. Journal of Sports Science, 31, 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolbring, G. (2008). Oscar Pistorius and the future nature of Olympic, Paralympic and other sports. ScriptEd, 5(1), 139–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Further Readings

  • McNamee, M. (2007). Whose prometheus? Transhumanism, biotechnology and the moral topography of sports medicine. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 1(2), 181–194. doi:10.1080/17511320701425173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miah, A. (2003). Be very afraid: Cyborg athletes, transhuman ideals, and posthumanity. Journal of Evolution and Technology, 13(2). http://www.jetpress.org/volume13/miah.html. Last Accessed 22 May 2015.

  • Miah, A. (2004). Genetically modified athletes: Biomedical ethics, gene doping and sport. London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, A. J., & Friedmann, T. (2006). Gene doping in sports: The science and ethics of genetically modified athletes. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andy Miah .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this entry

Cite this entry

Miah, A. (2015). Sports. In: ten Have, H. (eds) Encyclopedia of Global Bioethics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05544-2_399-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05544-2_399-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-05544-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Religion and PhilosophyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Humanities

Publish with us

Policies and ethics