As two scholars supportive of the Paralympic Games movement, we’ve often called Paralympic classification the “doping” of the movement. It’s controversial, tough to adjudicate, yet vital to the integrity of the Games.

This issue surfaced recently when one of us met with administrators from Queensland’s Centre for Olympic and Paralympic Studies and saw how multiple entities are preparing for the Brisbane 2032 Summer Paralympics.

One individual grabbing our attention was Dr. Sean Tweedy, a professor in the University of Queensland’s School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences. Tweedy is actively involved with the Paralympic community and took time to explain the complex classification system (e.g. S1-18; T1; C1, BC1, etc.) regulating Paralympic participation.

It brought back memories from the Beijing (2008) and Rio (2016) Summer Games, where we held leadership roles and started our education on the topic of classification challenges.

Tweedy talked passionately about a current S2 swimmer who has limited use of her arms, and can do little with her hands, legs or trunk. An S2 classification essentially covers individuals with cerebral palsy or significant limb amputations.

Meeting with Tweedy led to a meeting with Ross Ashcroft, the national integrity manager for the Australian Sporting Alliance for People with a Disability.

In the para sport community, classification is a highly controversial topic because some athletes seek category re-classification to........

© Sports Business Journal