Led Discussion 1

Maltreatment in Youth Sport: A Systemic Issue Gretchen Kerr, Anthony Battaglia, and Ashley Stirling

The recent, highly publicized cases of maltreatment of athletes have garnered critical attention by the public at large and stakeholders in sport, alike. For many, these cases threaten popular views that sport contributes in important ways to positive youth development. The growing evidence showing that maltreatment occurs to youth sport participants highlights the need for safe, harm-free sport environments as a fundamental prerequisite for positive developments to be reaped. By unpacking the case study of USAGymnastics and Dr. Larry Nassar’s abuses in this paper, the authors show that for athlete maltreatment to occur and be sustained across so many victims and so many years, more than a perpetrator is needed. The nature of the environment, from the interpersonal level to organizational policies and societal influences, contributes to the occurrence and perpetuation of athlete maltreatment. Using Bronfenbrenner’s ecological-systems model, the authors argue for a systemic approach to preventing and addressing athlete maltreatment. Recommendations are posed for safeguarding youth athletes and fostering the sporting conditions in which positive youth development can occur.

Keywords: abuse, gymnasts, USA Gymnastics

Sport is often referred to as a domain in which physical, emotional, and social outcomes for youth may be fostered (Fraser- Thomas, Côté, & Deakin, 2005; Holt, 2016). Built on the philo- sophical assumptions that youth have the potential and drive for positive growth and development, the movement for positive youth development in sport has garnered significant attention in the sport psychology, pedagogy, and coaching-related literatures (Damon, 2004; Fraser-Thomas, Côté, & Deakin, 2005; Holt, 2016; Lerner, Almerigi, Theokas, & Lerner, 2005; Lerner, Bowers, Geldhof, Gestsdóttir, & DeSouza, 2012). Organizational polices, the ways that programs are designed and delivered, and the nature and quality of the interactions that youth athletes have with coaches, parents, and peers all influence the optimization of positive devel- opment outcomes in the sport domain (Fraser-Thomas et al., 2005; Holt, 2016). While each of these factors can positively influence athletes’ experiences and developmental outcomes, these same fac- tors can negatively influence athletes’ sport experiences (Fraser- Thomas & Côté, 2009; Yabe et al., 2018). Growing awareness of incidence of maltreatment such as sexual and psychological abuse in youth sport has contributed to a more critical perspective on the potential developmental benefits and costs of sport participation for young people (Mountjoy, Rhind, Tiivas, & Leglise, 2015; Parent & Fortier, 2018).

Maltreatment is an umbrella term used in the child develop- ment and psychology literatures to refer to “volitional acts that result in or have the potential to result in physical injuries and/or psychological harm” (Crooks & Wolfe, 2007, p. 640). Fundamen- tal to our understanding of maltreatment is the misuse of power in order to engage in inappropriate behaviors, including both acts of commission (e.g., abuse) and acts of omission (e.g., neglect). Maltreatment can be categorized as either relational or nonrela- tional depending on the nature of the relationship in which the inappropriate behavior occurs (Crooks & Wolfe, 2007). Relational maltreatment entails behaviors that occur in the context of a critical

relationship role—when one individual in the relationship is dependent on the other for a sense of safety, trust, and fulfillment of needs (Crooks & Wolfe, 2007). For example, in the parenting and education domain this includes parent–child and teacher–child dynamics, whereas in sport the critical relationship context may be represented in parent–athlete, doctor–athlete, and coach–athlete relationships (Stirling, 2009). While nonrelational forms of mal- treatment still involve a misuse of power, these behaviors do not occur in a critical relationship context and may include bullying from peers, institutional maltreatment, and harassment (Crooks & Wolfe, 2007). While maltreatment refers to behaviors that are deliberate and volitional in nature, the intent of the perpetrator to inflict harm is considered irrelevant when considering whether or not a behavior constitutes maltreatment (Stirling, 2009).

Although both forms of maltreatment can be associated with harm to athletes, relational maltreatment is reportedly associated with more significant deleterious outcomes given the importance of the relationship for an individual’s development (Crooks &Wolfe, 2007; Wekerle, Wolfe, Dunston, & Alldred, 2014). As such, relational maltreatment in sport will be the focus of the current paper. Relational maltreatment consists of physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and neglect (Crooks & Wolfe, 2007; Stirling, 2009). Among all forms of maltreatment in the sport domain, sexual abuse has received the most attention empirically and in the popular press. Jerry Sandusky of Penn State football and Larry Nassar of USA Gymnastics are two prominent examples of coaches and team officials engaging in sexually abusive practices with athletes (Hobson, 2017; Kirby, 2018). Brazil’s former national gymnastics coach was recently accused of sexually abusing dozens of young gymnasts over the past 2 decades (Downie & Brooks, 2018). Child sexual abuse in U.K. football spanning a period of more than 30 years has recently emerged and is being investigated (BBC Sports, 2018), and former Canadian national ski coach Bertrand Charest was convicted recently of 37 charges related to the sexual assault of young athletes (Leavitt, 2017). These high- profile media cases are supported by researchers highlighting the occurrence of sexual abuse experienced by athletes at various sport levels ranging from recreational to elite and the risk factors that make athletes vulnerable to sexually abusive practices

The authors are with the Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. Kerr ([email protected]) is correspond- ing author.

237

Kinesiology Review, 2019, 8, 237-243 https://doi.org/10.1123/kr.2019-0016 © 2019 Human Kinetics, Inc. SCHOLARLY ARTICLE

Brought to you by UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS | Unauthenticated | Downloaded 06/11/24 08:12 PM UTC

(Fasting, Brackenridge, & Sundgot-Borgen, 2003; Kirby, Greaves, & Hankivsky, 2000; Vertommen et al., 2016).

When we learn about these disturbing cases of abuse in sport, there is a tendency to focus attention on the aberrant behavior of the perpetrator. Particularly with respect to pedophiles, there is an inclination to think that if we simply prevent such predators from entering sport, maltreatment will be prevented. But, how are perpetrators like Larry Nassar in the United States or Barry Bennell in the United Kingdom able to abuse so many athletes over decades without intervention? In this paper, we propose that the answer lies in the unique conditions associated with sport contexts that increase the risk of athlete maltreatment; these conditions include, for example, access to young people, inadequate education of sport stakeholders, insufficient policies and codes of conduct, an empha- sis on performance outcomes, and the self-regulating nature of sport. As a result, maltreatment should be viewed as a systemic problem involving numerous layers of influence beyond the pres- ence of a perpetrator or “bad apple.”

In this paper the case of USA Gymnastics and Dr. Larry Nassar is examined using a systems approach. Specifically, Bronfenbrenner’s (1999) ecological-systems theory, which iden- tifies various layers of influence from micro to macro levels, on the development of young people is applied to understand the occur- rence and perpetuation of experiences of athlete maltreatment. Given the assumption that a systems approach is necessary to understand the occurrence of maltreatment in sport, we also postu- late that a systems perspective is needed to prevent and address maltreatment. Only when the environment is safe and free from harmful experiences, including maltreatment, will the attainment of positive youth development through sport be possible.

Case Description: Larry Nassar

Larry Nassar’s involvement with gymnastics started at a young age as he began working with his high school team’s gymnasts as a volunteer trainer. On completing a degree in kinesiology at the University of Michigan in 1985, Nassar sought work in a training capacity for USA Gymnastics (USAG) at various competitive events and for youth gymnastics clubs (Dator, 2019; McPhee & Dowden, 2018). By the mid 1990s Nassar had graduated from medical school atMichigan StateUniversity (MSU) and established himself as an expert on gymnastics injuries (McPhee & Dowden, 2018). As Nassar continued his involvement in the medical and sport communities he cultivated a reputation as awell-respected and caring doctor who engaged in practices such as revising guidelines for ethical medical practices, reviewing the performance of other medical professionals, and advocating for an athlete-centered approach to medical treatment (Evans et al., 2018; McPhee & Dowden, 2018). Accordingly, Nassar was held in high esteem by colleagues and was often highly recommended and deemed influential in the success of athletes, receiving numerous awards for his medical contributions (Evans et al., 2018; McPhee & Dowden, 2018). Throughout Nassar’s involvement in the medical and sport domain he maintained several high-ranking positions including the national medical coordinator of USAG and assistant professor and team physician at MSU and developed relationships with powerful figures of authority at MSU, as well as the president of USAG and the owners of the U.S. Olympic Committee (USOC)–designated Olympic training site wheremany of the abuses occurred (Hauser & Zraick, 2018; McPhee & Dowden, 2018).

Together, Nassar’s reputation of being a highly skilled and athlete-centered doctor, his relationships with authority figures,

and poorly enforced athlete welfare policies in the organizations in which he worked created a climate of unaccountability and thus empowered him to engage in abusive practices with little fear of detection (Evans et al., 2018; Hauser & Zraick, 2018; McPhee & Dowden, 2018). In fact, although several claims of sexual abuse were made against Nassar as early as the 1990s, such claims were often overlooked or not investigated (Dator, 2019; McPhee & Dowden, 2018). It was not until 2016, nearly 30 years after Nassar’s initial sexual-abuse allegations and more than 400 victims later, that his practices were finally exposed and the organizations with which he was affiliated were forced to take responsibility (Kwiatkowski, Alesia, & Evans, 2018; McPhee & Dowden, 2018).

One of the many shocking elements of this case is how Nassar was able to perpetrate his abuses of so many victims over so many years. Why was he not stopped earlier? Why were the gymnasts’ expressed concerns about Nassar not heeded? The thesis of this paper is that Nassar’s offenses cannot be viewed in isolation but instead must be considered as a systemic issue whereby organiza- tional and sociocultural influences—such as sport philosophies, a lack of strong athlete protection measures, and a lack of enforce- ment and accountability by authority figures in key organizations— were critical to fostering an environment that allowed the athletes’ concerns to be ignored (Evans et al., 2018; Kwiatkowski et al., 2018). To analyze the various layers of influences in this case, we use Bronfenbrenner’s (1999) ecological-systems theory as an overarching framework.

Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological-Systems Theory

Bronfenbrenner’s (1999) ecological-systems theory has been im- plemented in child development, psychology, and sport research to explain how the inherent qualities of an individual and her or his environment interact to influence growth and development. The theory posits that development is a dynamic and recursive process influenced by different environmental systems and contexts. An individual interacts with five environmental systems: the micro- system, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem, and chronosystem. The microsystem is considered the most immediate context that influences an athlete’s development and thus includes the relation- ships the athlete depends on, such as coach–athlete, parent–athlete, and doctor–athlete relationships (Bronfenbrenner, 1999). The me- sosystem consists of the indirect interactions in the microsystem that influence an athlete’s environment and development, such as how parents and coaches interact and behave with one another (Bronfenbrenner, 1999). The exosystem refers to aspects of the sport community in which an athlete functions and through which he or she may be affected (Bronfenbrenner, 1999). An example of an exosystem interaction in the sport domain might be the extent to which coaches are educated or certified. The macrosystem involves the overarching culture in which the athlete is involved and thus may include a sport organization’s philosophical views on perfor- mance outcomes versus holistic athlete development and their policies (Bronfenbrenner, 1999). The chronosystem entails transi- tions over the athletes’ life span, the patterning of environmental events, and the sociohistorical contexts that may influence an athlete (Bronfenbrenner, 1999). Examples include the increase in opportunities for female participation in sport and the integration or lack thereof regarding safe sport policies over the last few decades.

KR Vol. 8, No. 3, 2019

238 Kerr, Battaglia, and Stirling

Brought to you by UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS | Unauthenticated | Downloaded 06/11/24 08:12 PM UTC

Athlete Maltreatment as a Systemic Issue

Numerous sport researchers (e.g., Brackenridge, 2003; David, 2005; Kerr & Stirling, 2015) have advocated for the importance of holistically examining athlete maltreatment, addressing both individual and sociocultural influences. Bronfenbrenner’s (1999) model is particularly appropriate to interpret maltreatment practices in sport, as the theoretical underpinnings of the model address the dynamic and recursive interactions of interpersonal relationships between the victim and the abuser (e.g., coach and athlete or doctor and athlete), as well as influences such as the inherent values in sport, organizational policies, and interactions among other social agents in sport (e.g., parents, sport administrators). Given the substantial body of research on the microsystem level of the coach–athlete relationship in the positive youth development liter- ature (e.g., Barnett, Smoll, & Smith, 1992; Erickson & Côté, 2016; Jowett & Cockerill, 2003), Bronfenbrenner’s model is particularly valuable in expanding the focus to include more macro and sociocultural influences.

The Microsystem: The Power of Authority Figures in Sport

Looking at interactions between athletes and adults in positions of authority and trust in the sport context, such authority figures may include coaches and support staff such as medical, nutritional, strength and conditioning, and psychological personnel. In the context of sport, authority figures are afforded substantial and unquestioned power (David, 2005; Tomlinson & Strachan, 1996). Among these relational dynamics in sport, to date most research has explored the substantial power held by the coach over athletes and the ways in which this power may be used in helpful and harmful ways (Burke, 2001; Jowett, 2005). Coaches are often viewed as “gods” or “parent figures” and as gatekeepers to athletic success by athletes and parents (Brackenridge, 2001; Kerr & Stirling, 2012). By virtue of their expertise, experience, access to resources, and decision-making authority, the dominance of a coach over an athlete and the socialization of the athlete puts the athlete in a position to be submissive, compliant, and obedient (Brackenridge, 2001; Burke, 2001; Stirling & Kerr, 2009).

For the USAG gymnasts, their young age and isolation from family and friends exacerbated their reliance on adults in positions of authority in sport (Jacobs, Smits, & Knoppers, 2017; Pinheiro, Pimenta, Resende, & Malcolm, 2014), including the coaches, physicians, and other support staff (McPhee & Dowden, 2018; Yan, 2018). This was highlighted by the victims at the Nassar trial who identified the isolated training environments, the power of authority figures, and the lack of safe, accessible places to take their concerns as increasing their vulnerabilities to abuse.

Interestingly, the ongoing emotionally and physically abusive patterns of coaching practices experienced by the USAG gymnasts played a role in Nassar’s abuse of athletes (Landsbaum, 2016; Mazor, 2012). Nassar was perceived by the gymnasts as a trusted listener, and at times he defended athletes against their coaches (McPhee & Dowden, 2018). In contrast to the abusive coaches, athletes viewed Nassar as kind and compassionate, one who often listened to their concerns sympathetically and offered them food and treats that were denied them by their coaches (Connor & Fitzpatrick, 2018). Ultimately, Nassar’s kindness to the athletes, relative to their coaches, and the esteem in which he was held served as barriers to the athletes’ disclosing and reporting their concerns about Nassar.

The Mesosystem: Influence of Adult Interactions on Athletes

At the mesosystem level, the influence of relationships among key stakeholders in sport, such as coaches, organizational officials, parents, and support personnel, and the ways that these relation- ships may contribute to athletes’ maltreatment experiences are of interest. To begin, at the elite level of sport, coaches may spend more time with athletes than do parents, thus enabling them to exert control over areas of athletes’ lives in and outside of sport, such as their social interactions and academics (Burke, 2001; Tomlinson & Yorganci, 1997). As parents are socialized into the elite-sport culture, they themselves, like the athletes, become dependent on the coach, deferring authority and decision making to her or him, believing that without the coach’s guidance their son or daughter will not achieve success (Harwood & Knight, 2009; Kerr & Stirling, 2012). This reliance on the “coach knows best” mentality limits parents’ ability to recognize or critically understand harmful behaviors for athletes and results in an unwillingness to report abuse in fear of jeopardizing their child’s chances of success (Harwood & Knight, 2009; Kerr & Stirling, 2012).

In the elite gymnastics environment, USAG gymnasts spent extended periods of time away from home as they traveled for training and competition, realities USAG parents were required to accept if their child was to achieve success. This was highlighted when the athletes trained at the Olympic training site—the Karolyi Ranch (McPhee & Dowden, 2018; Yan, 2018). Tasked with producing elite athletes, Bela and Martha Karolyi created an environment that was isolated, lacked oversight, and prohibited parents of USAG athletes from watching practices or interacting with their child (McPhee & Dowden, 2018; Yan, 2018). Although parents relinquished control and authority to coaches, sport admin- istrators, and support personnel on the premise trusting that their child would be cared for on their journey to elite status, this was often not the case (McPhee & Dowden, 2018).

When the parents had opportunities to interact with Nassar, he took advantage of these interactions to groom the parents to accept abusive practices. On many occasions, he provided a reassuring voice to parents who were concerned about what they perceived to be abusive practices used by the coaches. Furthermore, as the coaches continued to refer the athletes to Nassar for medical treatment, in spite of the athletes’ expressed concerns about his treatment, coaches failed in their duties to care for the athletes’ welfare; moreover, in some cases, coaches actively discouraged athletes from filing official reports against Nassar (McPhee & Dowden, 2018; Yan, 2018). Athletes were told that Nassar, as a medical doctor, knew what he was doing, and/or that the athletes must be exaggerating their concerns.

The Exosystem: The Sport Organization

Sport organizations have a role to play in protecting athletes from harm, including ensuring that appropriate background screening and reference checks are conducted of all employees and volun- teers; policies, procedures, codes of conduct are developed and disseminated; duty-to-report requirements are widely and clearly communicated; required onboarding occurs; educational modules and professional development are completed; and accessible, confidential, and independent parties are available to receive and investigate concerns.

In the case of Larry Nassar, three sport organizations were involved: MSU, where Nassar was employed, USA Gymnastics and the USOC. It is unclear whetherMSU, USAGymnastics, or the

KR Vol. 8, No. 3, 2019

Maltreatment in Youth Sport 239

Brought to you by UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS | Unauthenticated | Downloaded 06/11/24 08:12 PM UTC

USOC implemented mandatory training of adults in positions of authority on maltreatment, duty-of-care and duty-to-report require- ments, and methods to safeguard athletes from harm. Furthermore, it became apparent from the victim-impact statements during Nassar’s trial that the athletes did not have independent parties to whom they could disclose their concerns. Instead, the people some of the athletes told of their concerns had preexisting relation- ships with Nassar or served to benefit from the team’s winning record, thus highlighting the existence and power of conflicts of interest when independent, third-party individuals are not inte- grated into the complaint process. The fact that the former CEO of USAG and the former president of MSU, among others, have been subsequently charged in the Nassar case is illustrative of their failure to act on their duty of care over the young people in their charge (Freeman, 2018; Hauser & Zraick, 2018).

The Macrosystem: The Sport Culture

In an effort to understand and unravel how Nassar was able to engage in abusive practices with so many youth athletes with little to no fear of repercussions, it is essential to consider the culture in which he was situated. Sport has a long history of self-organization and self-regulation with no oversight body or regulatory system. Sport, unlike other youth-populated domains (e.g., education, child care, early childhood education), is autonomous and self- regulating, thus diminishing the likelihood that it may be affected by broader, external influences (Brackenridge, 2004; David, 2005). Such isolation and autonomy have allowed sport to perpetuate assumptions that it is inherently positive (Chappelet, 2010; David, 2005). However, the evidence of widespread maltreatment reported in various sport organizations worldwide suggests that the autono- mous, self-regulating nature of sport has precluded alignment with society’s standards and expectations for the treatment of young people. It has also insulated sport and coaching from the child- centered approaches used in parenting and education. The use of authoritarian and punitive coaching practices in sport, for example, is inconsistent with the child-centered approaches reflected in other youth-populated domains that advocate for democratic and positive disciplinary methods (David, 2005). It has been argued that as long as sport remains self-regulating and at arm’s length from govern- ment regulations and wider human rights initiatives, the imple- mentation, and accountability for implementation, of safe sport policies and practices will remain limited (Donnelly & Kerr, 2018; Kerr & Stirling, 2008). Ultimately, the historical power of auton- omy and self-governance afforded to sport organizations contri- butes to fragmentation and a general lack of monitoring and accountability, thus allowing issues such as maltreatment of youth athletes to be perpetuated and even legitimized (Boocock, 2002; Chappelet, 2010).

The problematic aspects of self-regulation and autonomy were evident when examining the governing bodies, specifically the USOC and the USAG, with which Nassar was affiliated. In the United States, no ministry of sport oversees athletic activity, and as a result, the lack of sport-governing structures has afforded the USOC broad authority over its national governing bodies (McPhee & Dowden, 2018). Despite the USOC’s being in a position of authority to ensure safe sport policies and procedures for athletes, it has tended to adopt a passive “service-oriented” approach to dealing with its national governing bodies (McPhee & Dowden, 2018). Similar to the service-oriented approach adopted by the USOC, the USAG promoted itself as an education and resource provider, exerting little authority over member clubs and

stakeholders, factors that hindered USAG from handling issues of maltreatment (Landsbaum, 2016; McPhee & Dowden, 2018). In addition, USAG’s ability to respond effectively was limited in part by procedural obstacles in the complaint-resolution process, such as requiring that a complaint be submitted from an athlete or an athlete’s parent/guardian and refusing to investigate allegations if the reporting party did not submit a signed written complaint or wished to remain anonymous (Cauterucci, 2016; McPhee & Dowden, 2018).

Sport cultures, particularly at the elite level, increasingly link funding to performance outcomes of the athlete or team. When a team such as the U.S. women’s artistic gymnastics team wins international competitions, funding from Olympic committees and sponsorships increase. In such a performance-driven culture, va- lues such as self-sacrifice, unyielding dedication and commitment to “the game,” taking risks, challenging limits, and winning are considered exclusive guides for appropriate athlete behavior (Coakley, 2014; Hughes & Coakley, 1991). With a focus on winning as the ultimate objective, athletes are vulnerable to being treated as expendable subjects (“means”), and as a result, experi- ences of maltreatment become normalized in the pursuit of perfor- mance excellence (“ends”) (Burke, 2001; David, 2005). During the Nassar trial, survivor statements revealed that USOC’s and USAG’s win-at-all-costs mentalities fostered a culture in which the needs and interests of athletes were disregarded in favor of performance goals, and as a result, athletes were socialized to accept physical, emotional, and sexual abuse (McPhee & Dowden, 2018; Moghe & del Valle, 2018). Some have proposed that the tremendous performance success experienced by the athletes enabled USAG to avoid scrutiny and ignore maltreatment accusa- tions such as those reported against Nassar (Freeman, 2018; Kwiatkowski et al., 2018; McPhee & Dowden, 2018).

Although complaints of Nassar’s abusive practices occurred as early as the 1990s, those reports were often hidden from stake- holders in the gymnastics community, as well as the public, to protect the image of USAG as an athlete-centered environment that produced internationally successful athletes (Dator, 2019; McPhee & Dowden, 2018). It was only after numerous allegations against Nassar were made public that the USOC and USAG could no longer ignore the evidence, and thus the authorities were contacted and appropriate legal action was taken (Evans et al., 2018). Overall, we propose that the predominant cultural philosophies focused on win-at-all-costs mentalities, the extraordinary performance success of USAG athletes, and the self-regulating nature of women’s gymnastics left these gymnasts vulnerable to experiences of abuse (Kwiatkowski et al., 2018; Landsbaum, 2016; McPhee & Dowden, 2018).

The Chronosystem: Influential Changes Over Time

Looking at the broader changes that influence athlete maltreatment and protection over time, it is important to note that although issues of maltreatment in sport are long-standing, attention specifically to safeguarding athletes from experiences of maltreatment in sport has only been garnered more recently. High-profile cases such as the Nassar case have heightened public awareness and concern about athlete maltreatment and protection. In an effort to foster more positive experiences for youth athletes, and thus limit mal- treatment, safe sport organizations, policies, and guidelines that include but are not limited to the Child Protection Unit in Sport in the United Kingdom (Boocock, 2002), the Toolkit for Safe- guarding Athletes from Abuse and Harassment developed by the

KR Vol. 8, No. 3, 2019

240 Kerr, Battaglia, and Stirling

Brought to you by UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS | Unauthenticated | Downloaded 06/11/24 08:12 PM UTC

International Olympic Committee (2017), and the International Safeguarding Children in Sport Working Group (2014) have been developed. Despite these various athlete-protection initia- tives, recent media reports such as the child sexual abuse scandal in U.K. football over several decades (BBC Sports, 2018) and the negative culture created over the years in Wrestling Canada that stimulated physical, emotional, and sexual abuse (Bennett, 2018) suggest that maltreatment continues to occur in various youth sport contexts. Athlete-protection polices, codes of conduct, and educa- tional programs have the potential to foster more positive youth experiences, but researchers have indicated that oftentimes such initiatives are not empirically based or evaluated to assess their effectiveness and efficacy (Kerr, Stirling, & MacPherson, 2014). Furthermore, there is a lack of monitoring and accountability procedures to ensure that policies and required education are appropriately communicated and enforced, officials responsible for handling issues of maltreatment are adequately educated, and officials avoid conflicts of interest (David, 2005; Donnelly & Kerr, 2018).

Inevitably, the increased public and scholarly attention to athlete maltreatment in recent years has been influenced, arguably in a positive way, by the rise of the #MeToo movement. This movement has become a worldwide phenomenon geared to raising awareness of the sexual violence experienced by women in their daily personal and professional lives. Many have attributed to the #MeToo movement a cultural shift in raising global consciousness of women’s experiences of sexual violence and the need for prevention and intervention. It has also been credited with making the disclosure of experiences of sexual violence easier and more socially acceptable for women. We purport that the #MeToo movement may have also influenced the sport context. It has raised awareness of the potential for sexual violence, in particular, to occur in sport and has had a facilitating effect on the disclosure and reporting of sexual violence. Currently, the public discourse stim- ulated by the #MeToo movement has focused on sexual violence; we hope that in time, more critical public and scholarly attention will be devoted to other forms of maltreatment that can be equally damaging to the health and well-being of athletes.

Recommendations

Athlete welfare and the protection of athletes from harm are fundamental to the conditions necessary for positive youth devel- opment and thus need to be a critical part of the conversation of optimizing developmental outcomes from sport. Furthermore, safeguarding and positive youth development must be considered from a holistic systems perspective, recognizing the multilayered influences on the risk to athletes of experiences of maltreatment in sport and their protection from harm.

At the microsystem level, proponents of athlete-centered sport models argue that partnership rather than an autocratic relationship between athletes and adult stakeholders may help alleviate the problematic use of positions of power and authority held by key stakeholders. At the mesosystem level, allowing parents to observe training, providing education about grooming processes and strat- egies for safeguarding, and establishing effective communication avenues between and among athletes, coaches, support staff, and parents may help prevent maltreatment. The Nassar case and the resultant criminal convictions of adults who failed to enact their duty of care over young people and the bankruptcy claim of USAG should be a wake-up call for sport organizations to screen employ- ees and volunteers, develop and widely communicate policies and

codes, and ensure orientation, training, and/or education with respect to safeguarding. A heightened awareness of the harmful effects of performance-focused philosophies that marginalize attention to athletes’ holistic health and well-being would also contribute to the development of safe environments for athletes. A cultural shift away from autonomy and self-regulation to oversight by independent bodies would help address and investigate com- plaints of maltreatment without conflicts of interest. Given the well-documented failures of self-regulation in the financial sector, the Catholic Church, and the Boy Scouts, it is no surprise that athlete welfare has suffered from sport’s system of self-regulation. At the chronosystem level, it might be argued that infusion of society’s expectations and standards with respect to the nurturing of young people in sport may be facilitated by moving away from self-regulation and insularity. Sport can no longer afford to be exempt from broader expectations with respect to youth develop- ment and protection.

Conclusion

To optimize the potential developmental benefits that youth sport may offer, an environment free of maltreatment is required. In this paper we argued, using the case of Dr. Larry Nassar andUSAG, that Nassar was able to commit and perpetuate his abuses of so many athletes across decades because the power within interpersonal relationships, the organizational structures, and the culture enabled the abuse. In other words, maltreatment in sport should be viewed in a systemic way. This perspective was expressed when Mitchell Garabedian, the lawyer for some of the victims of the Catholic Church and Nassar, claimed, “If it takes a village to raise a child, it also takes a village to abuse one” (Barnes, 2016, para. 7). To prevent and addressmaltreatment in sport and optimize the opportunities for sport participation to be an environment conducive to positive youth development, all layers of influence must be addressed.

References

Barnes, H. (2016, January 16). Spotlight: The reporters who uncovered Boston’s Catholic child abuse scandal. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/jan/13/spotlight-reporters- uncovered-catholic-child-abuse-boston-globe

Barnett, N.P., Smoll, F.L., & Smith, R.E. (1992). Effects of enhancing coach–athlete relationships on youth sport attrition. The Sport Psy- chologist, 6, 111–127. doi:10.1123/tsp.6.2.111

BBC Sports. (2018, February 15). After Barry Bennell convictions, where now for football’s sexual abuse scandal? BBC Sports. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/42993689

Bennett, D. (2018). Report concerning independent review of coaching culture for Wrestling Canada Lutte. Retrieved from https://wrestling. ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/FINAL-WCL-Report-for-Release- December-2-2018.pdf

Boocock, S. (2002). The Child Protection in Sport Unit. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 8, 99–106. doi:10.1080/13552600208413342

Brackenridge, C. (2001). Spoilsports. Understanding and preventing sexual exploitation in sport. London, UK: Routledge.

Brackenridge, C. (2003). Dangerous sports? Risk, responsibility and sex offending in sport. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 9, 3–12. doi:10. 1080/1355260031000137922

Brackenridge, C. (2004). Women and children first? Child abuse and child protection in sport. Sport in Society, 7, 322–337. doi:10.1080/ 1743043042000291668

KR Vol. 8, No. 3, 2019

Maltreatment in Youth Sport 241

Brought to you by UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS | Unauthenticated | Downloaded 06/11/24 08:12 PM UTC

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1999). Environments in developmental perspective: Theoretical and operational models. In S.L. Friedman & T.D. Wachs (Eds.), Measuring environment across the lifespan (pp. 3–28). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Burke, M. (2001). Obeying until it hurts: Coach–athlete relationships. Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 28, 227–240. doi:10.1080/ 00948705.2001.9714616

Cauterucci, C. (2016, August 5). USA Gymnastics ignored stories of coaches’ child sex abuse for years while athletes suffered. Slate. Retrieved from https://slate.com/human-interest/2016/08/usa- gymnastics-ignored-stories-of-coaches-sex-abuse-for-years.html

Chappelet, J.L. (2010). Autonomy of sport in Europe. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe Publishing.

Coakley, J. (2014). Sport in society: Issues and controversies (11th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

Connor, T., & Fitzpatrick, S. (2018, April 19). McKayla Maroney says Larry Nassar earned her trust with bread. NBC News. Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mckayla-maroney-says-larry- nassar-earned-trust-loaf-bread-n867301

Crooks, C.V., & Wolfe, D.A. (2007). Child abuse and neglect. In E.J. Mash & R.A. Barkley (Eds.), Assessment of childhood disorders (4th ed., pp. 639–684). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Damon, W. (2004). What is positive youth development? Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 591, 13–24. doi:10.1177/0002716203260092

Dator, J. (2019, January 16). A comprehensive timeline of the Larry Nassar case. SBNation. Retrieved from https://www.sbnation.com/2018/1/ 19/16900674/larry-nassar-abuse-timeline-usa-gymnastics-michigan- state

David, P. (2005). Human rights in youth sport: A critical review of children’s rights in competitive sport. New York, NY: Routledge.

Donnelly, P, &Kerr, G. (2018). Revising Canada’s policies on harassment and abuse in sport: A position paper and recommendations. Toronto, ON, Canada: Centre for Sport Policy Studies, Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education, University of Toronto.

Downie, A., &Brooks, B. (2018,May 3). Brazil gymnastics coach accused of sexual abuse. Reuters. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/ article/us-gymnastics-brazil-abuse/brazil-gymnastics-coach-accused- of-sexual-abuse-idUSKBN1I42DY

Erickson, K., & Côté, J. (2016). A season-long examination of the intervention tone of coach–athlete interactions and athlete develop- ment in sport.Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 22, 264–272. doi:10. 1016/j.psychsport.2015.08.006

Evans, T., Guillen, J., Kaufman, G., Kwiatkowski, M., Mencarini, M., & Alesia, M. (2018, April 4). How Larry Nassar abused hundreds of gymnasts and eluded justice for decades. IndyStar. Retrieved from https://www.indystar.com/story/news/2018/03/08/larry-nassar- sexually-abused-gymnasts-michigan-state-university-usa-gymnastics/ 339051002/

Fasting, K., Brackenridge, C., & Sundgot-Borgen, J. (2003). Experiences of sexual harassment and abuse among Norwegian elite female athletes and nonathletes. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 74, 84–97. PubMed ID: 12659479 doi:10.1080/02701367.2003. 10609067

Fraser-Thomas, J., & Côté, J. (2009). Understanding adolescents’ positive and negative developmental experiences in sport. The Sport Psychol- ogist, 23, 3–23. doi:10.1123/tsp.23.1.3

Fraser-Thomas, J., Côté, J., &Deakin, J. (2005). Youth sport programs: An avenue to foster positive youth development. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy, 10, 19–40. doi:10.1080/1740898042000334890

Freeman, H. (2018, January 26). How was Larry Nassar able to abouse so many gymnasts for so long? The Guardian. Retrieved from

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/jan/26/larry-nassar-abuse- gymnasts-scandal-culture

Harwood, C., & Knight, C. (2009). Understanding parental stressors: An investigation of British tennis parents. Journal of Sport Sciences, 27, 339–351. doi:10.1080/02640410802603871

Hauser, C., & Zraick, K. (2018, October 28). Larry Nassar sexual abuse scandal: Dozens of officials have been ousted or charged. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/22/ sports/larry-nassar-case-scandal.html

Hobson, W. (2017, December 28). Six years later, Penn State remains torn over the Sandusky scandal. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/sports/penn-state- six-years-after-sandusky-scandal/?utm_term=.5048a93a52d7

Holt, N. (2016). Positive youth development through sport (2nd ed.). London, UK: Routledge.

Hughes, R., & Coakley, J. (1991). Positive deviance among athletes: The implications of overconformity to the sport ethic. Sociology of Sport Journal, 8, 307–325. doi:10.1123/ssj.8.4.307

International Olympic Committee. (2017). Safeguarding athletes from harassment and abuse in sport: IOC toolkit for IFs and NOCs. Retrieved from https://www.iwf.net/wp-content/uploads/downloads/ 2018/10/IOC_Safeguarding_Toolkit_ENG.pdf

International Safeguarding Children in Sport Working Group. (2014). International safeguards for children in sport. Retrieved from https:// www.sportanddev.org/sites/default/files/media/implementation-guide- for-organisations-who-work-with-children-a5-version-re.pdf

Jacobs, F., Smits, F., & Knoppers, A. (2017). ‘You don’t realize what you see!’: The institutional context of emotional abuse in elite youth sport. Sport in Society, 20, 126–143. doi:10.1080/17430437.2015.1124567

Jowett, S. (2005). The coach–athlete partnership. The Psychologist, 18(7), 412–415. https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/volume-18/edition-7/ coach-athlete-partnership

Jowett, S., & Cockerill, I.M. (2003). Olympic medallists’ perspective of the athlete–coach relationship. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 4, 313–331. doi:10.1016/S1469-0292(02)00011-0

Kerr, G., & Stirling, A. (2008). Child protection in sport: Implications of an athlete-centered philosophy. Quest, 60, 307–323. doi:10.1080/ 00336297.2008.10483583

Kerr, G., & Stirling, A. (2012). Parents’ reflections on their child’s experi- ences of emotionally abusive coaching practices. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 24, 191–206. doi:10.1080/10413200.2011.608413

Kerr, G., & Stirling, A. (2015). Applying a critical ecological approach to the issue of athlete abuse in sport. In R.J. Schinke & K.R. McGannon (Eds.), The psychology of sub-culture in sport and physical activity: Critical perspectives (pp. 17–30). London, UK: Routledge.

Kerr, G., Stirling, A., & MacPherson, E. (2014). A critical examination of child protection initiatives in sport contexts. Social Sciences, 3, 742–757. doi:10.3390/socsci3040742

Kirby, J. (2018, May 16). The sex abuse scandal surrounding USA Gymnastics team doctor Larry Nassar, explained. Vox. Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/identities/2018/1/19/16897722/sexual- abuse-usa-gymnastics-larry-nassar-explained

Kirby, S., Greaves, L., & Hankivsky, O. (2000). The dome of silence: Sexual harassment and abuse in sport. Halifax, Canada: Fernwood.

Kwiatkowski, M., Alesia, M., & Evans, T. (2018, January 31). A blind eye to sex abuse: How USA Gymnastics failed to report cases. IndyStar. Retrieved from https://www.indystar.com/story/news/investigations/ 2016/08/04/usa-gymnastics-sex-abuse-protected-coaches/85829732/

Landsbaum, C. (2016, August 4). Report: USA Gymnastics ignored dozens of allegations of sexual abuse by coaches. TheCut. Retrieved from https://www.thecut.com/2016/08/report-usa-gymnastics-ignored- sex-abuse-claims.html

KR Vol. 8, No. 3, 2019

242 Kerr, Battaglia, and Stirling

Brought to you by UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS | Unauthenticated | Downloaded 06/11/24 08:12 PM UTC

Leavitt, S. (2017, December 8). Ex–ski coach Bertrand Charest sentenced to 12 years in prison for sex crimes. CBC News. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/bertrand-charest-sentenced- 1.4438348

Lerner, R.M., Almerigi, J.B., Theokas, C., & Lerner, J.V. (2005). Positive youth development: A view of the issues. Journal of Early Adolescence, 25, 10–16. doi:10.1177/0272431604273211

Lerner, R.M., Bowers, E.P., Geldhof, G.J., Gestsdóttir, S., & DeSouza, L. (2012). Promoting positive youth development in the face of contex- tual changes and challenges: The roles of individual strengths and ecological assets.NewDirections for Youth Development, 2012(135), 119–128. doi:10.1002/yd.20034

Mazor, M. (2012, March 29). Disturbing abuse allegations against former coach, Doug Boger, in the 1970s. FLOGYMNASTICS. Retrieved from https://www.flogymnastics.com/articles/5026572-disturbing- abuse-allegations-against-former-coach-doug-boger-in-the-1970s

McPhee, J., & Dowden, J. (2018). The constellation of factors underlying Larry Nassar’s abuse of athletes. Retrieved from https://www. nassarinvestigation.com/en

Moghe, S., & del Valle, L. (2018, January 17). Larry Nassar’s abuse victims, in their own words. CNN. Retrieved from https://www.cnn. com/2018/01/16/us/nassar-victim-impact-statements/index.html

Mountjoy, M., Rhind, D.J.A., Tiivas, A., & Leglise, M. (2015). Safe- guarding the child athlete in sport: A review, a framework and recommendations for the IOC youth athlete development model. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 49, 883–886. PubMed ID: 26084527 doi:10.1136/bjsports-2015-094619

Parent, S., & Fortier, K. (2018). Comprehensive overview of the problem of violence against athletes in sport. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 42, 227–246. doi:10.1177/0193723518759448

Pinheiro, M.C., Pimenta, N., Resende, R., & Malcolm, D. (2014). Gymnastics and child abuse: An analysis of former international

Portuguese female artistic gymnasts. Sport, Education and Society, 19, 435–450. doi:10.1080/13573322.2012.679730

Stirling, A., & Kerr, G. (2009). Abused athletes’ perceptions of the coach–athlete relationship. Sport in Society, 12, 227–239. doi:10. 1080/17430430802591019

Stirling, A.E. (2009). Definition and constituents of maltreatment in sport: Establishing a conceptual framework for research practitioners. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 43, 1091–1099. PubMed ID: 19028734 doi:10.1136/bjsm.2008.051433

Tomlinson, A., &Yorganci, I. (1997). Male coach/female athlete relations: Gender and power relations in competitive sport. Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 21, 134–155. doi:10.1177/019372397021002003

Tomlinson, P., & Strachan, D. (1996). Power and ethics in coaching. Ottawa, Canada: Coaching Association of Canada.

Vertommen, T., Schipper-van Veldhoven, N., Wouters, K., Kampen, J.K., Brackenridge, C.H., Rhind, D.J., . . . Van Den Eede, F. (2016). Interpersonal violence against children in sport in the Netherlands and Belgium. Child Abuse & Neglect, 51, 223–236. PubMed ID: 26516053 doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.10.006

Wekerle, C., Wolfe, D., Dunston, J., & Alldred, T. (2014). Child maltreat- ment. In E. Mash & R. Barkley (Eds.), Child psychopathology (3rd ed., pp. 737–798). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Yabe, Y., Hagiwara, Y., Sekiguchi, T., Momma, H., Tsuchiya, M., Kuroki, K., . . . Nagatomi, R. (2018). The characteristics of coaches that verbally or physically abuse young athletes. Tohoku Journal of Experimental Medicine, 244, 297–304. PubMed ID: 29643277 doi:10.1620/tjem.244.297

Yan, H. (2018, February 2). Karolyi Ranch produced champions and a culture of fear, ex-gymnasts say. CNN. Retrieved from https://www. cnn.com/2018/02/02/us/karolyi-ranch-gymnastics-abuse-allegations/ index.html

KR Vol. 8, No. 3, 2019

Maltreatment in Youth Sport 243

Brought to you by UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS | Unauthenticated | Downloaded 06/11/24 08:12 PM UTC