the moral reasoning of student athletes and athletic training students

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Catlin and Murray (1996, p. 231) commented on this state of sport by writing, “Increasingly sophisticated pharmacological methods have been created to enhance athletic performance in ways that threaten the integrity and meaning of Olympic competition.” Self reflection by former Australian world discus champion, Reiterer discussed his doping practices and the thoughts that made him retire before the 2000 Sydney Olympics. “There was something pathetically wrong with the fact that a packed home arena – an entire country – would urge me on without any concept of the truth behind my ultimate athletic achievement, or of the sham of which they were unwittingly a part” (Noakes, 2004, p. 849). Doping is illegal, violates both the letter and spirit of the rules and impacts the integrity of the sport. Unfortunately, Olympic and international competitions are not the only levels of sport threatened. The professional and collegiate levels are also impacted with the trickle down theory in effect to even lower levels including high school and middle school (Stoll, Gwebu, & Beller, 2006). Current and future efforts to prohibit doping in sport need to continue to press the issues and get to the heart of the problem in order to preserve that which is so beautiful about sport. Fairness of Competition as an Argument Against Doping in Sport Questions about whether doping should be allowed or whether athletes should be given a choice are continually raised concerning fairness of competition. Some, like Savulescu, Foddy, & Clayton (2004) argue that performance enhancing drugs should be allowed in sport. According to these authors, sport discriminates against the genetically unfit. “Sport is the province of the genetic elite (or freak)” (Savulescu, Foddy & Clayton, 2004, p. 667). They describe cases where such things as extraordinarily large feet have proven to be an unfair advantage to some swimmers. Therefore, in order to provide a truly fair playing field, athletes should be allowed to 44
use their judgment in discriminating between which methods of doping they will or will not use. If all athletes are unrestricted by regulations, then everyone will have an equal opportunity and sport will be fair again (Savulescu, Foddy, & Clayton, 2004). This argument raises many moral questions. Consider the following scenario: an elite athlete has trained hard for many years, made sacrifices in his or her personal, social and educational careers. This athlete has found the optimal combination of natural ability, intense discipline, training and commitment. Suddenly this athlete recognizes that his or her competitors have an added advantage in their willingness to practice doping. The athlete now has two options: (1) face the competition with a potentially significant disadvantage given to other competitors in the form of doping or (2) choose to engage in the practice as well in an effort to remain competitive (Catlin & Murray, 1996). “One athlete’s decision to use performance-enhancing drugs exerts a powerful effect on the other athletes in the competition. The athlete remains free to choose whether or not to violate the rules of the sport as their competitors are doing, but is not free to pursue his or her great dream with confidence that the best athlete will win.” Catlin & Murray (1996, p. 237) Thus, in order to remain competitive the athlete may be placed in an unfair position where he or she feels coerced to take performance enhancing drugs. Because few studies have been conducted with athletic training students, this study has the potential to add to the body of knowledge not only about the moral reasoning of athletes and athletic training students but the relationship of moral reasoning relative to higher education and intercollegiate sports character development mission. Thus, the goal of this study is to examine the general moral reasoning of student athletes and athletic training students when faced with 45
Page 1 and 2: THE MORAL REASONING OF STUDENT ATHL
Page 3 and 4: ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Competitive, Respon
Page 5 and 6: sport. The results of this study we
Page 7 and 8: APPENDIX A ________________________
Page 9 and 10: CHAPTER ONE Introduction What is it
Page 11 and 12: college edifice, their paternalisti
Page 13 and 14: are stronger adults because of the
Page 15 and 16: purpose of higher education, which
Page 17 and 18: dope or not dope as well as how ins
Page 19 and 20: the athletic training facilities. T
Page 21 and 22: Certified athletic trainers and ath
Page 23 and 24: 5. What are the differences between
Page 25 and 26: 4. Designer Drugs - A drug produced
Page 27 and 28: CHAPTER TWO Literature Review The p
Page 29 and 30: more of a look like German institut
Page 31 and 32: institutions, conferences, and nati
Page 33 and 34: the cultural norms as a measure of
Page 35 and 36: “Moral reasoning, a systematic, l
Page 37 and 38: describe the reasons for particular
Page 39 and 40: it must be noted that only a low po
Page 41 and 42: Taylor-Hanson, in review). However,
Page 43 and 44: issues in sport or specific issues
Page 45 and 46: naturally occurring male sex hormon
Page 47 and 48: stored. After a few weeks, normal l
Page 49 and 50: of what the supplement actually con
Page 51: Despite the research and the warnin
Page 55 and 56: CHAPTER THREE Methodology Research
Page 57 and 58: Ergogenic Aids and Moral Competence
Page 59 and 60: and then evaluated each of the thre
Page 61 and 62: Procedures Arrangements were made w
Page 63 and 64: CHAPTER FOUR Results The purpose of
Page 65 and 66: Table 2. Means and standard deviati
Page 67 and 68: I do not care whether Arnold choose
Page 69 and 70: Danny should do whatever will make
Page 71 and 72: Team Indiv. ATS F % F % F % Most co
Page 73 and 74: Most common reason not to take the
Page 75 and 76: Hypothesis Six No difference exists
Page 77 and 78: and find that low levels of moral r
Page 79 and 80: athletic training students did not
Page 81 and 82: another paper, the notions of care-
Page 83 and 84: esearch scored relatively low when
Page 85 and 86: Scenario five presented a similar s
Page 87 and 88: conversation and attitude speaks to
Page 89 and 90: consistent set of moral principles,
Page 91 and 92: REFERENCES Alder, P., & Alder, P.A.
Page 93 and 94: Beller, J.M., Stoll, S.K., Williams
Page 95 and 96: Colby, A., Kohlberg, L., Gibbs, J.,
Page 97 and 98: Honour, J.W. (2004). The fight for
Page 99 and 100: Perry, P.J., Lund, B.C., Deninger,
Page 101 and 102: Smith, R.A. (1988). Sports and Free
Page 103 and 104:
APPENDIX A HAHM - BELLER VALUES CHO
Page 105 and 106:
APPENDIX B EAMCI Instrument Please
Page 107 and 108:
2. George, while hanging out at the
Page 109 and 110:
4. Tony is the kind of athletic tra
Page 111 and 112:
APPENDIX C IRB approval 103
show all

the moral reasoning of student athletes and athletic training students

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?