ABSTRACT
Given the state of the anti-doping crisis, the case studies we present of inhumane consequences (which are far from exhaustive and collectively show the problems are systematic not isolated), and the inadequacies of the alternatives proposed so far, we outline several ideas for radical reform. A return to amateurism may not seem pragmatic, but since anti-doping has its roots in amateur sport ideologies and the motivations to dope are often financial, then a solution may well be to simply remove one of the main incentives. Perhaps less radical would be to reform the business model, to reduce the income differentiation between the best athletes and the less successful, and thus undermine the rationale for doping which is to win at all costs. Other recommendations focus upon controlling athletes’ access to doping drugs. If they were only allowed to consult doctors who have been accredited by WADA, then we reduce the risk of unscrupulous medical advisers supplying doping products. Related to which, the TUE system should be discarded if fairness and equity are the key objectives. Less radical solutions could include health checks and better education leading to athletes making informed decisions in the context of their own health and sporting ambitions, while a 24-hour chaperone system would reduce the need for testing if an athlete is constantly under surveillance. While the more controversial of these suggestions might seem unreasonable, they are not much of a departure from surveillance systems and paternalistic approaches already in place. Last, we suggest a model for making sanctions more nuanced, transparent and consistent without the need for an arbitration process.
