ABSTRACT
Because COVID-19 is spread by exhaled droplets that are especially transmissible to nearby people, sport creates a risk of infection proportionate to the proximity of competitors. Nonetheless, despite the relative youth of high school athletes, soft paternalism does not provide a strong reason for restricting or suspending high school sport. High school athletes are neither so ignorant of the risks, nor subject to so much external pressure to play, nor so incapable of reflecting on their short- and long-term values, as to render their decision to play non-autonomous. In contrast, Mill's harm principle grounds a very strong argument for restrictions. The harm in question is not so much the risk of COVID-19 infection among athletes and others who consent to participate in or attend athletic events, but the collateral damage to non-consenting bystanders and community members. While the exact risks of infection from high school sport are unknown, we know enough to justify requiring precautions such as mask mandates for athletes and fans, restrictions on the number of spectators, and outright suspension of athletic events when the infection level in the local community is dangerously high.
