Does the Existence of Steroid Addiction Alter the View That Steroid Use in Sport is Cheating?

Abstract

It is widely accepted that doping in sports is, by definition, cheating. If we allow that cheating is advantage-seeking behavior utilized by one party in an agreement-defined activity that disallows that behavior, then taking drugs when others do not is cheating. The focus of this definition is on the intentions and purpose of the actor, which is primarily about advantage seeking. This article will argue that the effect of anabolic steroid addiction on the volition of the actor caeteris paribus invalidates the adequacy of cheating to describe this behavior.

Keywords:

• Sport
• sport philosophy

Notes

1. In fact, WADA’s records for 2012 indicate that anabolic agents constituted 2,279 adverse analytical findings versus 1,159 adverse findings for all other PEDs combined (WADA, 2012, p. 16).

2. While not without valid controversy (see Hyman & Malenka, 2001), in keeping with common scholarly practice on the matter, the terms addiction and dependence are used synonymously.

3. The author sees nothing that would reduce that percentage significantly over the intervening 14 years.

4. In keeping with the notion that a rule can be fairly excepted, WADA does allow for appeals based on the idea that an athlete had accidently ingested the substance, and upon successful appeal, the athlete is addressed accordingly. WADA refers to it as the “specified substance” clause; see WADA (2013).

5. It could be said, as it could with all drugs, that initial use was voluntary, but in a state of addicted use, the user is not choosing to use and is certainly not in the same relationship with the drug as when he/she started using.