A Scoping Review of Transgender Policies in the 15 Most Commonly Played UK Professional Sports

Michael McLarnon, Jane Thornton, Gail Knudson, Nigel Jones, Danny Glover, Andrew Murray, Michael Cummings and Neil Heron ()
Additional contact information
Michael McLarnon: Centre for Public Health, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast BT12 6BA, UK
Jane Thornton: Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, ON N6A 3K7, Canada
Gail Knudson: Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia (UBC), Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada
Nigel Jones: Medical Department, British Cycling, Manchester M11 4DQ, UK
Danny Glover: Medical and Scientific Department, Ladies European Tour (Various), Denham UB9 5PG, UK
Andrew Murray: Sport and Exercise, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH8 9YL, UK
Michael Cummings: Centre for Public Health, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast BT12 6BA, UK
Neil Heron: Centre for Public Health, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast BT12 6BA, UK

IJERPH, 2023, vol. 20, issue 4, 1-18

Abstract: Introduction: There has been much debate recently on the participation of transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) athletes in sport, particularly in relation to fairness, safety and inclusion. The 2021 IOC Framework on Fairness, Inclusion and Non-discrimination acknowledges the central role that eligibility criteria play in ensuring fairness, particularly in the female category, and states that athletes should not be excluded solely on the basis of their TGD identity. Aims: To identify policies that address TGD athlete participation in the 15 major United Kingdom (UK) sporting organisations and to summarise the evidence for each of these policies. Methods: A scoping review of TGD policies from the 15 major UK sporting organisations. Results: Eleven of the governing bodies had publicly available TGD policies. Most of the sporting associations drew guidance from the official 2015 IOC Consensus Meeting on Sex Reassignment and Hyperandrogenism, particularly with regard to physiological testosterone levels. Many organisations referenced their policies as a guide for decision making but stated that they ultimately made case-by-case decisions on an athlete’s eligibility. Relevant considerations not addressed in most policies included pre- versus post-pubertal athletes, justification for testosterone thresholds, the length of time out of competitive action (if any) for transitioning athletes, the irreversible advantage from male puberty (if any), the responsibility for and frequency of follow up for hormonal testing and the consequences for athletes outside set testosterone limits. Conclusions: There is a lack of consensus among the top 15 UK sporting organizations relating to elite sport participation for TGD athletes. It would be useful for sport organizations to work together to develop greater standardization/consensus for TGD athlete policies, taking into consideration fairness, safety and inclusion in each sport.

Keywords: scoping review; transgender and gender-diverse (TGD); TGD athletes; transitioning; guidelines; policies; fairness; inclusion; safety; testosterone; 2021 IOC Framework on Fairness; inclusion and non-discrimination (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/4/3568/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/4/3568/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:4:p:3568-:d:1071704

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().