MGT4028 Ethics : Olympic with Regards to Doping

Ethics and Gene Doping:

The increase in the detections of the fresh substances and new approaches of doping is not connected with a similarly augmented responsiveness of the many risks associated with health with taking of the substances to such methods. During that same point of time when the scientific research discovered the map containing human gene, the industry of doping was wearisome in stealing those fresh knowledge for commercializing of the same.

The ethical issues that can be related to doping have also been found in the uncovering of the sampling of tissues. It will be unlikely that the athletes would be forced in giving approval to the process given the persistent surroundings of the biopsies that are required to be submitted. Adding to that are the several forms of genetic doping not requiring the unswerving injection of the genes in the preferred besieged organ.

Genetic manipulation takes in a future of heritably customized athletes participating in competitions that are being divided as per the modified genome, making use of the similar principle similar to the Paralympics’ athletes division. The world of sports is heading towards the future where the artificial competitions would not be won by the most deserving of the athletes but by the artifacts one.

Instance:

A recent scandal over the doping situation of Russia and the International Olympic Committee’s (IOC) subsequent judgment regarding the participation of the Russian athletes in the Olympic Games did create extensive interest, not only from the ones interested and dedicated  to sports, but from the broader global community.

Ethical Dilemma:

All alarmed with the enticed breath for the decision that one way or the other would exhibit the intestinal resilience and determine with the IOC in confronting the concern and display determined and forthright leadership. The IOC has had the prospect in taking the ‘moral high ground’. The question persists to socialize; with the question being did IOC exhibit stronger ethical leadership that was expected out of them.

In encountering an ethical dilemma the IOC was dealt with a number of considerations that required vigilant assessment. On the first instance, Richard McLaren, Independent Person WADA Investigation of Sochi Allegations seems to enclose indisputable evidence that the Moscow Laboratory activated within a foolproof methodical doping operation that was State controlled enabling the doped Russian athletes in participating at the Sochi Games with impunity. This doping of systematic nature was not being restricted to the Sochi Winter Olympians. It extended to a huge section of elevated performance athletes within the sporting system of Russia and clearly involving the same having an intent in competing at the Rio Olympics. In being dealt with this evidence the IOC was evidently obligatory to act.

The Rules:

A second complicated determinant guiding the deliberations of IOC would have been the other significant documents. Such documents generally take in the policies, processes and the rules as specified within the IOC Rule book that is the Olympic Charter, the World Anti-Doping Code (WADA) along with the IOC’s Ethics Commission Code of Ethics.

These documents added with the advice from the lawyers of the sports and ethical philosophers, one could assume rationally that these information sources needs to be evaluated thoroughly. An evaluation of such documentation provides a ‘muddied’ imminent into the decision of the IOC. In the very first occasion, the IOC would have discussed in all probability the requirements of ethical decision in light of the deontological position; that is, the right or the wrong things as per their laws, regulations, and policies along with the practices.

Determining whether the rules and policies of IOC have been contravened, one would be speculating that the decision would be very straight forward. Moreover, one could assume understandably that responsibility for considering the same rests on the IOC. However, the documentation factor, as being recognized above, has incompatible and perplexing messages.

For example, the Olympic Charter is of the opinion that IOC is the ultimate authority on all the factors related to ‘Olympic’. Adding to that is the fact that any organization or person fitting in to the movement of Olympic is generally bound by the stipulations of the Olympic Charter. The similar Charter states the fact that one of the missions along with roles of the IOC for the purpose of protecting that athletes who are clean and that the Olympic Games would be bringing together the selected athletes by the National Olympics Committee (NOCs), whose entries has been acknowledged by the International Olympic Committee (IOC).

It also states the fact that NOC’s need to acclimatize and execute the World Anti-Doping Code. Furthermore, the Olympic Charter is of the opinion that one of the disposition of the International Federation (IF), within the Movement of the Olympic in establishing and enforcing with accord with the spirit of the Olympic, the rules regarding the practices of the particular sports.

Responsible Parties:

Within this declaration clear dilemmas materialize. The dilemma appears for not overseeing the rules, regulations and laws of the IOC have been contravened, as in all probability it seems like they noticeably have, but instead who is liable for arbitrating along with sanctioning of the breaches on such stuffs. On other occasions, the IOC have been claiming the role of the supreme authority, however on the other, it has been allocating the responsibility for some of the decisions on such of the matters to the NOC’s and the IF. There lies one issue or problem as can be stated with the decision of the IOC. In this illustration, they have been passing the responsibility to the IF on many such occasions. In doing the same, people have been returning to the expectation of all those that are fascinated within this situation. The anticipation is in being the requirement for the IOC in demonstrating the fact of a stronger ethical leadership. However, clearly the question remains now as whether this expectation has been met.

In taking or making of such decisions, arguably the IOC appears in having abandoned the expected possible leadership. From the personal perspective it would in all probability seem like there is certain genuine decisions for the decisions that are being passed to the IF’s, however on the other hand, it is to be seen whether this was the ‘right’ thing to do in the light of their individual rules, policies and laws along with their claim for the superlative authority. However, the chances remain minimal.

What does the most good?

In the second illustration, the IOC would in all probability be considering this scandal of doping from what has been called, in the situation of ethical decision making, ‘ a technological position’. This needs any decision in being considered the ‘universal good’. That is what the most enviable decision is leading to the result that has been promoting the maximum good along with the harm that is least in nature. Here the IOC would be requiring considering such goods as ‘harm’ keeping in mind the athlete, but equally important is the fact that the veracity along with the fortification of the brand of its own and the sport’s spirit across the globe. Such considerations would require conjecture on the consequence of the decision that it would have on the social, educative, social, and economic and the ethical value of the movement of Olympic, inclusive of the games and sports per se.

This contemplation has probably been taking place within the rushed time outline and the magnificence of due conscientiousness that is being compromised. Here the issue arises as to whether the decision of the IOC is mainly for the greater good, mainly, the greater good would be for the sport and minimization of the any harm intended towards the sports. By sports, in referring to all forms of the sport, not just privileged sport and expectantly would be taking into account the social, educative and moral assessment.

An uniformly related contemplation, making use of the approach needs to be considered the action course that would be taken enhancing the virtuous standing of the IOC within global community along with whether this enhancement would be protecting the global brand of its. It required being clear in working towards the ruling that the IOC required in determining whether the decision that has been made kowtow to the ethical principles of universal nature along with the values that is viewpoint of the Olympism supports.  

What Olympic Games Represent:

A third consideration would be that the IOC might have to enter a situation where it is mainly focused on a situation or position of authencity where the beliefs of personal and collective nature of the decision makers need to be considered. Here, the individual veracities along with the beliefs about the things it stands for needs to be evaluated in light of this issue. Challenging answers to the predicament would have been contributing to the decision, by evidently expressing a position by high caliber. That is, any sort of decision would be clearly demonstrating the kind of organization the IOC would ever want to be. Further adding to that what would the members of IOC want to represent the Olympic Games under the present circumstances and in the future too. Such thinking generally has stronger prophet direction along with that one taking in substantial assumption without having the luxury of time.

Clearly taking in is the consequentialism of the decision of IOC is yet to be played out in full flow. The world has been waiting with much interest, as this decision; in all probability has the probability of determining the future sustainability of the social and educative worth of sports predominantly if it is generally seen as the human practice of valued nature in the initiatives involving the education and community factors. Much interest is also on the factors that take into account the Olympic Games perception and of course IOC’s ethical standing.

2008 Beijing and 2012 London Olympics:

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) was of the notion of retesting around 450 athletes for doping samples from the Olympic Games. The re-tests have been following the work with the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) and the International Federations (IFs). They were focusing on the athletes who could take active part in the 2016 Olympics at Rio. Every test was conducted making use of the latest scientific examination method. As a result of this up to 30 athletes from six various sports were banned from taking any sort of part in the Rio Olympics. The IOC executive board agreed unanimously in initiating the proceedings on immediate basis. All the athletes who have infringed the rules of anti-doping have been banned from competing at the 2016 Rio Olympic Games.

The main fight is to defend the athletes who are clean with the main aim being stopping any sort of drug cheats coming into the Olympic Games at any point. The IOCF have involved itself in re-testing again and again a number of athletes from the 2008 and 2012 edition of the Olympic Games. The samples of the athletes those who have been awarded medals following the disentitlement of the others would in all probabilities would be retested again.

All these measures are being considered as powerful strikes that have been done against the athletes who generally cheat to win. IOC is of firm opinion that cheaters have no place to hide and should not have any place in the sports arena. The re-tests from Beijing and London along with the measures that have been taken following the perturbing allegations against the Sochi laboratory have been another key step in protecting the clean athletes irrespective of any nation and sport respectively. The IOC is in the habit of keeping samples for even ten years so that the cheats understand and know it for themselves that they can never rest under any circumstances. The IOC have stopped many from participating in the Rio games which specifies their determination in protecting the reliability of the competitions within the Olympic, inclusive of the Rio anti-doping laboratory, so that the magic of Olympic games gets unfolded everytime.

Protecting the clean athletes is the key main stake of the Olympic Agenda 2020, the premeditated roadmap  for the future of the Olympic Movement. This takes into account all those concerned in the cases of doping whether it be any athletes, doctors, coaches, or any organization needs to be punished  making use of the full available powers.

During the 2016 Rio Olympics, the IOC funded the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) in carrying out the intelligence-gathering in testing the lead up to the Olympic Games along with being as independent as possible. Out of competition testing at the times of the Olympic Games would be guided by the group of intelligence from WADA, in making it more efficient and targeted. The Court of Arbitration of Sports (CAS) has been handling cases from the Rio Olympic Games. The CAS Anti-doping Division has replaced the IOC Disciplinary Commission in hearing and deciding on the cases of doping at the Olympics along with the factor of subsequent re-analysis of the samples that have been taken at the games.

The IOC has set up a twenty million US dollar fund in protecting the clean athletes. Ten million dollars is being used in developing a tough program for awareness and education at the risk of match fixing and any sort of exploitation related to corruption and competition. A further ten million has been used in supporting the projects providing a fresh scientific method to anti-doping. Through the help of the Medical and Scientific Commission, the IOC have called on the researchers in applying for their sustaining and funding of the projects that are athlete-centered, taking in both the social and the scientific research. Committing to a 10 million US dollar for funding of the research pertaining to the factor of anti-doping for the athletes protection, the approach of this fund is to balance, but not the replacement, existing programs of the anti-doping researches.

The Executive Board of the International Olympic Committee did throw its full support behind the ‘Global Declaration Against Corruption’ that was being adopted at the Summit of International Anti-Corruption that is being organized by the British Prime Minister David Cameron. The IOC was symbolized there with the Member of IOC along with the President of the International Paralympic Committee Sir Philip Craven, chairing a panel on the sports and was joined ably by Paquerette Girard Zappelli, the IOC’s Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer. The IOC would always continue to work in shedding full light on the issue. Therefore, the IOC would be keeping its position as the civil party in the procedure of French Justice and the Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer of IOC that would further aggressively cooperate in the legal inquiry.

Conclusion:

It can be concluded that corruption is at the heart of many of the global issues. It is important to overcome the same along with specifically welcoming prosperity along with defeating terrorism and extremism is there to succeed. The conference that was discussed in the last segment along with the allegations against the contention of Tokyo for the Olympic Games 2020, the IOC took communication of the declaration of the Japanese Olympic Committee along with the former President of Tokyo 2020 Bidding Committee. It has been stated that the payments that have been mentioned in the media were a legitimate of the fees of the consultants that is being followed by a proper and full contract with the monies being fully audited. The International Olympic Committee is not an organization that is formed with the motive of making profit generally made up of volunteers committed towards building a better world through sports. It generally redistributes around 90 per cent of the income to the broader movement of sporting.

References:

Bird, Stephen R., et al. "Doping in sport and exercise: anabolic, ergogenic, health and clinical issues." Annals of clinical biochemistry 53.2 (2016): 196-221.

Budgett, Richard, and Lars Engebretsen. "The protection of clean athletes through the IOC research fund." (2014): bjsports-2014.

Dikic, Nenad, Nenad Djurdjevic, and Michael J. McNamee. "Doping." Encyclopedia of Global Bioethics (2017): 1-14.

Duntas, Leonidas H., and Vera Popovic. "Hormones as doping in sports." Endocrine 43.2 (2013): 303-313.

Gao, Jing. "Reflection on the present strategies of war on doping." 3rd International Conference on Management, Education, Information and Control (MEICI 2015). 2015.

Gleaves, John, and Matthew Llewellyn. "Sport, drugs and amateurism: Tracing the real cultural origins of anti-doping rules in international sport." The International Journal of the History of Sport 31.8 (2014): 839-853.

Hermann, Aaron. "Has doping harmed athletic performance?." Australasian Science 36.8 (2015): 20.

Hughes, D. "Ethical and logistical challenges for anti-doping systems in sport." Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 20 (2017): 87.

Kim, Jung Il, et al. "Experience of Sport Medicine and Knowledge of Sport Doping." Korean Journal of Family Practice 6.5 (2016): 426-434.

Lippi, Giuseppe, and Camilla Mattiuzzi. "Doping and anti-doping testing in sports: are we only pointing at the bright side of the moon?." Journal of Laboratory and Precision Medicine 2.4 (2017).

Maennig, Wolfgang. "Inefficiency of the anti-doping system: cost reduction proposals." Substance use & misuse 49.9 (2014): 1201-1205.

Mandic, Gordana Furjan, et al. "Sports nutrition and doping factors in synchronized swimming: Parallel analysis among athletes and coaches." Journal of sports science & medicine 12.4 (2013): 753.

Mazanov, Jason, et al. "Athlete support personnel and anti?doping: Knowledge, attitudes, and ethical stance." Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports 24.5 (2014): 846-856.

Mottram, David, et al. "Perspective of pharmacists in Qatar regarding doping and anti-doping in sports." The Journal of sports medicine and physical fitness 56.6 (2016): 817-824.

O'Leary, John. Drugs & Doping in Sports. Routledge, 2013.

Penfold-Mounce, Ruth. "Book review: M Yar, Crime, Deviance and Doping: Fallen Sports Stars, Autobiography and the Management of Stigma." (2015): 139-141.

Petróczi, Andrea, Paul Norman, and Sebastian Brueckner. "Can we better integrate the role of anti-doping in sports and society? A psychological approach to contemporary value-based prevention." Acute Topics in Anti-Doping. Vol. 62. Karger Publishers, 2017. 160-176.

Pitsiladis, Yannis, et al. "Make Sport Great Again: The Use and Abuse of the Therapeutic Use Exemptions Process." Current sports medicine reports 16.3 (2017): 123-125.

Venables, Michelle. "Doping in Sports: Blood Oxygenation Enhancement." Illumin 14.2 (2013).

Voss, Sven Christian, et al. "The effect of a period of intense exercise on the marker approach to detect growth hormone doping in sports." Drug testing and analysis 6.6 (2014): 582-586.

Wagner, Ulrik, and Kasper Møller Pedersen. "The IOC and the doping issue—An institutional discursive approach to organizational identity construction." Sport management review17.2 (2014): 160-173.