Psychology, not rules alone, needed to fix coach-athlete power imbalances
A new framework suggests that traditional ethics codes miss the psychological vulnerabilities inherent in coach-athlete relationships. The research argues decision-makers and sports organizations should embed psychodynamic insights into their ethical guidelines—a shift with implications for duty of care, liability, and institutional accountability across mentoring industries beyond sports.
Originaltitel: On coaching and the ethics of care: a psychodynamic approach
<p>This paper is prompted by the intuition that the common ethical theories do not fully comprehend the (internal) psychological structures of the asymmetrical coach-athlete relationship. Through a few examples I attempt to investigate the ethically vulnerable coach-athlete relationships that often emerge. With a philosophical view taken from Nel Noddings’ theory of an ethics of care, I argue that we may need a broader perspective on the ethical issues which also include a psychoanalytic or psychodynamic perspective towards the relationships in question. Doing that would in itself be an ethical approach to take for a deeper understanding of the relationships between coaches and athletes.</p>