I’m in the process of writing a book chapter on an edited work about ethical issues in sports coaching with Professor Stephen Olivier.
(I just gave an overview on wordpress and when I saved it, it disappeared apart from the first line above…. absolutely gutted!!)
(So, second time lucky… hopefully a shorter version.)
What we originally intended to do was to take a liberatarian position on coaching violent, dangerous and risky sports: essentially that if a person wants to put themselves at risk and in danger of serious or even fatal injury, then there is no obligation for a coach to intervene or prevent them from doing so.
However, after having thought about it for a while, I am now thinking that we may have to take a soft paternalist stance as it may be that the definition of a coach / instructor entails a certain degree of responsiblity towards those coached, even if just to make their athletes aware of the risks and the coach’s judgment of the athlete’s skill level and capacity to accurately assess their own ability and risk.
There are lots of questions all tangled up in this issue (which I wrote down earlier but I’m not going to do so again) so it may be that it becomes too much to deal with in a single book chapter.
Anyway, the reason for this blogpost is to ask if anyone had any thoughts, comments or suggested readings on this.