M2 Overview of Maltreatment

WHO Maltreatment

WHO defines maltreatment as:

• “Maltreatment is an umbrella term that encompasses all types of physical and/or emotional ill-treatment, sexual abuse, neglect, negligence, and commercial or other exploitation, which results in actual or potential harm to health, survival, development or dignity in the context of the relationship of responsibility, trust, or power.”

WHO Maltreatment Key Features

Based on the WHO definition, maltreatment has several key features

• Based on power imbalances

• Preventative

• Holistic

• Intent Irrelevant

Based on Power Imbalances

Maltreatment often happens between a person (or group) with less power and another person (or group) with more power

• Often seen in coach/athlete dynamics

Preventative

WHO definition encompasses “potential for harm”

• Definition doesn’t just include maltreatment that causes harm

Holistic

Encompasses physical, sexual, psychological, neglect harm

Intent Irrelevant

Intent of the perpetrator is irrelevant

• If it has the potential to harm or causes harm, perpetrator is held accountable

Maltreatment Relationships

The misuse of power that occurs with maltreatment changes depending on the relationship b/w the perpetrator and the victim

• Abuse

• Bullying

• Harassment

Abuse

Maltreatment that occurs within a dependent/critical relationship

• Significant influence/direct power

Bullying

Maltreatment that occurs b/w peers

Harassment

Maltreatment that occurs within an authority-based non-dependent relationship

• Less intimate

Critical Relationship

A relationship that has significant influence over an individual’s sense of safety, trust, and fulfillment of needs

• Crooks & Wolfe, 2007

e.g. parent/child, coach/athlete, captain/teammate

Bases of Power

Comes from French and Raven’s Theory of Power (1959)

• Power is fluid and dynamic, and can be held in different ways

Types of Powers

1. Reputation/Prestige

2. Age

3. Gender

4. Physical Size

5. Resources

6. Decision-making

7. Expertise

8. Knowledge

Prevalence of Maltreatment Among Canadian National Team Athletes

Study conducted by Kerr, Willson, & Stirling (2019) to find the prevalence of maltreatment in Canadian National Team Members

Demographics

Maltreatment and Prevalence

• Athletic Status: Current = 794, Retired = 237

• Gender: Men = 38%, Women = 61.5%, Neither = 0.1%

• Age: Mean = 27.3

• Disability: Yes = 11.6%, No = 88.1%, Prefer not to disclose = 0.3%

• Racialized: Yes = 9.7%, No = 87.1%, Prefer not to disclose = 3.2%

• LGBTQ2I+: Yes = 7.3%, No = 90.3%, Prefer not to disclose = 2.4%

• Indigenous: Yes = 1.6%, No = 98.4%

Percentage of Harmful Behaviours

Most common harmful behaviour experienced was psychological harm followed by neglect harm

• Physical harm and sexual harm were reported less often

• Overall, retired athletes reported more harm than current athletes

Percentage of Harmful Behaviours by Gender

Overall, women reported more harmful experiences than men

Getting Better?

On the surface, it may seem like things are getting better

• Retired athletes reported more harm than current athletes

BUT could be that

• In the moment, you don’t perceive something as harm

• Culture of sport

Psychological Abuse

Acts of aggression (hitting, throwing objects, physical intimidation)

Psychological Abuse Frequency

Most common (Current %/ Retired %):

1. Shouted at in angry/critical manner (31.3% / 39.1%)

2. Gossiped or told lies about

3. Put down, embarrassed, humiliated

4. Intentionally ignored in response to poor performance

5. Criticized as a person for sub-par performance

Psychological Abuse Perpetrators

Most common:

1. Coaches

2. Peers

3. High Performance Director

Neglect Abuse

Act of omission (acts that are NOT done that result in harm)

Neglect Abuse Frequency

Most common (Current %/ Retired %):

1. Unequal treatment (47.5% / 63.7%)

2. Training while injured/exhausted

3. Sacrifice education/career

4. Ignored

5. Trained in unsafe conditions

Neglect Abuse Perpetrators

Most common:

1. Coaches

2. High Performance Director

3. Sport Administrator

Duty to Report

Legal requirement in Canada to report suspected abuse of an underage person

Sexual Abuse

Any sexual interaction perpetrated against will, without consent, or in an aggressive, exploitative, coercive, manipulative, or threatening manner

Sexual Abuse Frequency

Most common (Current %/ Retired %):

1. Sexist jokes/remarks (14.3% / 16.4%)

2. Intrusive sexual glance

3. Sexually explicit communication

4. Sexually inappropriate touching

5. Indecent exposure

Sexual Abuse Perpetrators

Most common:

1. Peers

2. Coaches

3. Strangers (Current) OR Strangers/Trainers (Retired)

Physical Abuse

Contact or non-contact behaviour that can cause physical harm to an athlete

Physical Abuse Frequency

Most common (Current %/ Retired %):

1. Excessive exercise (11.0% / 18.4%)

2. Slapped/hit (1.5% / 1.0%)

3. Force to the ground (1.0% / 1.0%)

Physical Abuse Report

Why is physical abuse reported much less common than other abuse types?

• Much harder to do out in the open

• Some forms of physical abuse not as normalized in sports

Influences of Intersectional Identities

Racialized athletes

LGBTQ2I+ athletes

Para-athletes

Indigenous athletes

Sport as a Mirror

Sport can be a mirror to society

• e.g. experiences of physical harm/exploitation outside sport (in society) are reflected in sport

Racialized Athletes

Reported significantly more experiences of physical harm than non-racialized athletes

LGBTQ2I+ Athletes

Reported significantly more experiences of sexual harm

Para Athletes

No significant difference in reported harm compared to able-bodied athletes

• Study may not have captured specific vulnerabilities that para athletes experience

Indigenous Athletes

Too few to conduct analysis

• Reinforces lack of diversity in national teams

Eating Disorders Frequency

Most common (Current %/ Retired %):

1. Thought about engaging (20.2% / 27.9%)

2. Engaged in ED behaviours (15.7% / 22.3%)

3. Diagnosed (4.4% / 2.5%)

Self Harm Frequency

Most common (Current %/ Retired %):

1. Thought about engaging in self harm (8.9% / 11.4%)

2. Engaged in self-harming behaviours (5.4% / 6.0%)

Help Seeking Frequency

Most common (Current %/ Retired %):

1. Sought help for mental health issues (34.6% / 33.2%)

2. Felt supported by organization while receiving help (18.5% / 9.4%)

The Evolution of Sport Standards

Historical precedents for change:

1. Women’s participation

2. Criminal prosecution

3. Inclusion of para athletes

Women’s Participation

Women were historically excluded from sports (e.g. Boston Marathon until the 1960s, due to beliefs about physical harm to reproductive health)

Criminal Prosecution

Physical assault, once normalized (e.g. in hockey), now faces more regulation and criminality

Inclusion of Para Athletes

Paralympics grew despite initial notions of unsafety and illegitimacy

Why Now?

Societal norms have changed. What was okay in homes, schools, workplaces, relationships in the past are not necessarily okay now

• Sport must be held to the same standard

• Sport must align its practices to be consistent with other domains in which people, including young people, live, work, learn, and develop

Erikson’s Theory of Psychosocial Development

Aa theory of human development that explains how people grow socially, emotionally, and psychologically across the lifespan

Psychosocial Development Mechanism

Throughout their lifespan, people face a series of psychosocial conflicts (internal struggles involving self and society)

• Successfully resolving each conflict helps develop a healthy personality and identity

School Age

(7-11 yrs) Characterized by learning new skills

• “How can I be good or bad?”

Industry

• Feeling useful and increased self-worth

Inferiority

• Sense of worthlessness or inferiority

Adolescence

(12-18 yrs) Characterized by learning goals, values, beliefs (sense of community, uniqueness)

Identity

• Foundation of a strong sense of self

Role confusion

• Being unsure of who you are, drifting, feeling disappointed/confused

Early Adulthood

(19-29 yrs) Sharing oneself with others (romantic & platonic relationships), establishing relationships while maintaining individual identities

Intimacy

• Developing healthy & close relationships in which you can open up to others

• Love, trust, tenderness

• Healthy boundaries

Isolation

• Inability to form close relationships

• Poor relationships, weak social support