Ethics Revisited

June 13, 2017 by Tony Retrosi Leave a Comment

In order to do what is right, one must know what is right.
I believe that nearly everyone knows the difference between right and wrong.
DO WHAT IS RIGHT.
You do not need a lawyer to tell you your moral absolutes. A strong and unbending moral will, while commendable, is not enough to ensure a moral life. Equally important is moral intelligence. History testifies that blind, misguided will and conviction can cause incalculable damage (the Crusades, the Inquisition, Naziism, Islamic Extremists. And unless we avoid it extremism in the USA). We need to stop being surprised when someone does and the right thing and start expecting it.

When ever I hear someone giving a monologue on their ethical behavior- you can be pretty sure they know what they did was wrong

Researching Ethics. We SHOULDN’T be surprised when someone does something right.

June 5, 2017 by Tony Retrosi Leave a Comment

This was originally published on my other blog- VACILANDO. I have just finished the lecture on ethics I did at a conference in Idaho. I will get my presentation up shortly but I though I would share this for anyone interested. I believe the article I was reading was in the Huffington Post.

Originally Published 05/30/2017

Right now I have sequestered myself at a cabin so I could finish some writing. I had to work on a lecture on ETHICS. As often happens in my research I get pulled down the rabbit hole. I get too deep and can get side tracked.

In our society there is a lack of REAL heroes. Why is it difficult for people to do the right thing AND when people make the right decision it is viewed as remarkable.

New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu stood up last week and delivered a moving, bracingly honest speech to explain why he removed four Confederate monuments from his city.

“You elected me to do the right thing, and this is what it looks like,” Landrieu told the crowd gathered at New Orleans’ former city hall. “These monuments purposefully celebrate a fictional, sanitized Confederacy, ignoring the death, ignoring the enslavement and the terror that it actually stood for.”

While it was remarkable to see a Southern politician speaking boldly and clearly about race ― in the face of death threats and protests ― it was perhaps even more notable to see a leader publicly demonstrating the character of his convictions. Landrieu’s speech went viral.

As the country grows ever more cynical, divided and partisan, we’re not used to honesty and courage from our leaders. Seeing a politician stand up for what he or she believes is the right thing is increasingly rare.

Political discourse and civic life has so devolved in 2017 that a man charged with physical assault, Republican Greg Gianforte, was elected to Congress Thursday in Montana with the backing and full support of his party. Just the day before, Gianforte, a self-made tech millionaire, wrapped his hands around the neck of a reporter, threw him to the ground, and repeatedly punched him for asking a question.

Comparing a longtime politician in Louisiana (Landrieu comes from a political family and is a former lieutenant governor) to an upstart businessman-cum-politician may seem like a stretch. But these two men make a neat case study on the state of ethics and integrity in 2017.

Newly elected Rep. Greg Gianforte (R-Mont.) has been charged with misdemeanor physical assault.

These days the public no longer expects leaders to do what’s right. We’ve grown accustomed to name-calling and carefully crafted milquetoast middle-of-the-road statements. We’re used to lying, and we expect leaders to put party and their own careers before all else.

“Norms have shifted,” said Gautam Mukunda, the author of Indispensable: When Leaders Really Matter and a professor at Harvard Business School. “We expect leaders to be bad, and people live up to what you expect of them. We’ve created a self-fulfilling prophecy of bad behavior and it is profound.”

To many Americans, politics is either a massive conspiracy, a “House of Cards” dystopia, or a playground for craven buffoons, a la “Veep.” We are no longer surprised as we witness leaders live up to these expectations, lying about meeting with foreign agents, changing their stories, and blaming everyone but themselves when things go wrong.

You could see footprints of our lower standards all over the Gianforte incident. Instead of apologizing for his naked act of aggression, Gianforte initially released a statement blaming the reporter, Ben Jacobs of The Guardian. “It’s unfortunate that this aggressive behavior from a liberal journalist created this scene at our campaign volunteer BBQ,” the statement read.

Worse, the statement was false. It claimed Jacobs shoved the microphone in Gianforte’s face and refused to lower it after being asked, but audio and witness accounts from a Fox News crew refuted the claims.

Republican Speaker of the House Paul Ryan gamely admitted what Gianforte did was wrong, and called on him to apologize, but he also said would support his election if that’s what the people of Montana wanted.

Of course, we can’t actually know what the people in Montana thought of the assault. A majority of voters cast their ballots before the body-slam.

It’s easy to imagine a different politician simply stepping out of the race in the face of such an incident. Remember when Howard Dean appeared to scream in one speech and it doomed his entire bid for the presidential nomination?

Some conservative pundits tried to spin the assault this week as a good thing: “Gianforte, the manly and studly candidate, threw the 125-pound wet dishrag reporter from The Guardian to the ground,” Rush Limbaugh said of the incident, according to an online transcript of his show posted on his website. Laura Ingraham, while gamely allowing that politicians should stay cool in such situations, also tried to cast Jacobs as wimpy for not fighting back. What “would most Montana men do if ‘body slammed’ for no reason by another man?” she asked in a tweet.

As is too often the case in 2017, partisanship blinded us from even distinguishing right from wrong. The increasing divide between right and left and the intensely personal way each side attacks the other means that even ethics are now partisan. Republicans and Democrats call each other “bad” or “evil,” and there is often no higher playing field where everyone agrees to nonpartisan standards and values (don’t hit people, don’t lie, etc.).

“I don’t think Obama was perfect, but it’s hard to imagine more of a straight-arrow person. Not a hint of scandal,” Mukunda said. Yet somehow half of America just didn’t it see it that way. People who disagree with his politics won’t typically acknowledge that he acted with respect for the office. “You don’t hear a lot of that,” Mukunda said.

Yet at the same time, people are hungry for heroes ― men and women with humility who will stand up for what’s right. When former acting Attorney General Sally Yates refused to enforce President Donald Trump’s travel ban because she believed it was unconstitutional, many people found it thrilling. When Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) criticizes the Trump administration for its failings, he’s lauded.

Former acting Attorney General Sally Yates refused to enforce Trump’s muslim ban because she believed it was unconstitutional. She was fired for refusing.

Indeed, we need people like this to set examples, Mukunda says. “The extent that we have culturally deprived people of that is troubling.”

It’s also highly dysfunctional. Integrity is the bedrock of a properly functioning organization, Joseph Badaracco told HuffPost recently. Badaracco has been teaching an introductory course in ethics, leadership and accountability to Harvard Business School students for the past decade. He defines integrity as a consistency between what you believe, say and do. “It all hangs together,” he said.

“There’s a way in which integrity shouldn’t be newsworthy ― we assume it, rely on it and count on it,” Badaracco said. “It’s not exactly like obeying the laws of gravity, but we ought to be able to assume it’s there.”

The ability to know what’s right and follow through on it with conviction isn’t something Badaracco believes can really be taught to people by the time they reach Harvard Business School.

“We don’t teach people how to have integrity. Or even teach the importance of it,” he says. “If someone doesn’t understand that, they have a deficiency in their education or development and we can’t remedy that.”

Badaracco says his focus is on making hard decisions. The grey areas. “Not right versus wrong where a person with integrity will know what’s right,” he explains. “But right versus right where it’s not really clear.”

But civil discourse has devolved from this graduate-school-level thinking. Americans elected Trump, a man whose most original thinking seems to come through in his creative penchant for name-calling. Many mistook Trump’s plainspoken manner for authenticity, and perhaps conflated this with honesty and integrity.

These are not the same things.

USA Gymnastics – It’s about being a professional.

March 12, 2017 by Tony Retrosi 7 Comments

On occasion I am called as an expert witness. When I have to do that I always start with the phrase, “I reserve the right to change any and all opinions in this report in the event of additional information being made available or information previously provided is learned to be erroneous. ”

I had an e-mail yesterday from someone who asked me if I was WITH or AGAINST USA Gymnastics and the current board and president. I do not have any more information than anyone else who can read a newspaper. I try to avoid sensationalism and pseudo-journalism. I am a firm believer in freedom of the press. Newspapers today have a difficult task. They must report the news truthfully but they also need to sell papers. Sometimes these two objectives crash into each other. A newspaper will get a piece and they will run it dry. Pretty soon everyone has to be on one side or the other. It is not about being WITH or AGAINST someone or something. It is about being a professional.

Like many, I got involved with the sport after watching the Olympics. After college, going into coaching seemed to be the most natural thing. I love nearly every minute I spend in the gym coaching. I AM A GYMNASTICS PROFESSIONAL.

Tip O’Neil, the former representative from Massachusetts famously said, “All Politics is Local”. Although safety should not be a political issue, all safety with athletes starts locally. In your club, in your town, in your state and in your region.

Gymnastics Professionals at ALL LEVELS have failed some athletes. When they should have reported something but didn’t. When they hired a person with a questionable background. When we see behavior at a competition or training camp that we question and then we don’t follow up. Even by innocently putting themselves in situations that can be misconstrued by the public.

If the accusations against Dr. Nassar prove true then the legal system will make him pay. Hindsight should always be 20/20 but we can not go back in time to fix things. We can only move forward. He had so many people fooled. Me included. I have known Dr Nassar for more than 20 years and I have trusted him seeing athletes in my program including my own daughter. I am heartbroken over this but NOT ONCE did he ever give me reason to question him.

With the information we currently have – I too want to make someone pay. This must be someone’s fault. Someone should have done something 20 years ago. The reality is that no one I knew suspected anything. If we had, we would have reported it.

USA Gymnastics was one of the first National Governing Bodies to have a code of ethics and to suspend and permanently ban coaches who have breached those ethical codes. Our popularity as a sport and our recent chain on International Victories will keep USA Gymnastics in the limelight. Everyone will be looking at us. We must become the example for all sports.

I find current statements by the USOC slightly hypocritical. In 1999 the USOC was warned that many other Olympic sport governing bodies lacked basic sex abuse prevention measures. At the time USOC officials objected to USA Gymnastics immediately banning coaches convicted of sex crimes. When USA Gymnastics urged something be done, the USOC pushed back. In 1999, Scott Blackmun was deputy executive director and general counsel of USOC. Fast forward to last week, Blackman and the USOC “demanded” that the President of USAG resign. It seems like they are trying to distract the media.

Can we, as gymnastics professionals, do better? Of course we can- and WE MUST. There is not one medal that is worth the abuse that could occur. There will be countless medals that will be won without abuse. But it must start with each of us. In our clubs, in our communities and towns and in our states and regions. Set the bar high and hold each other to that standard. USA Gymnastics is a membership driven organization. It is bottom up, not top down.

An Open Letter to the USA Gymnastics Community

Safe Sport

I welcome your comments and appreciate your thoughts. BUT- be professional.

Gymnastics Coach’s Code of Professional Conduct

December 23, 2011 by Tony Retrosi Leave a Comment

I NEED TO THANK JOHN HOWARD FROM THE GYMNASTICS ZONE FOR LETTING ME RE- POST THIS. John has some great articles on his website. If I were you, I would check it often! Follow him on twitter @gymnasticszone.

If you did not read Drs Joe and Sue Massimo’s article on Ethics, You may want to read that first.

ETHICS

Code of Professional Conduct

What make you a PROFESSIONAL COACH?

Just getting paid does not make you a PROFESSIONAL COACH.
Just paying a membership fee does not make you a PROFESSIONAL COACH
Just taking a test and passing a background check does not make you a PROFESSIONAL COACH..

Coaching is a lifetime commitment to learning and teaching. Coaching is understanding your own shortcomings and weaknesses and fixing them.

Professional gymnastics coaches control their own feelings and emotions in order to move gymnasts forward in dealing with their gymnastics careers. Professional gymnastics coaches have the highest standards when it comes to the the role model they are for gymnasts and how those gymnasts move through their gymnastics career and the rest of their lives. Professional gymnastics coaches live up to even higher ideals and standards than they expect of their gymnasts. Professional gymnastics coaches follow a code of conduct in their personal and professional lives.

Read the entire Article

CODE OF CONDUCT

THE ISSUE OF ETHICS

December 6, 2011 by Tony Retrosi Leave a Comment

“The Issue Of Ethics”

Dr. Joe Massimo & Dr. Sue Massimo

Excerpt from Psychology and Gymnastics by Drs. Joe and Sue Massimo.

In today’s climate of politically correct responses, it is clear that ethics is a concept that is well known and discussed in considerable detail. Many professions have a strict and fairly well monitored code of ethics (lawyers, medical doctors, psychologists, etc.). Many of these directives were a direct consequence of years of planning and deliberation on the issue. Coaching sports as a profession should be no different and coaching young athletes should definitely have a strict code of ethics.

If we look in the past to an issue of “Olympic Coach” published by the U.S. Olympic Committee Division of Coaching Development, an article appeared that dealt with ethics in coaching. A challenge in sport was offered during a presentation at the USOC Coaching Symposium. In this presentation, it was stressed that the coach’s highest priority should be in establishing relationships with athletes that help them develop in positive ways. The most important first step, in this regard, would be the development of a set of principles that would address expectations in the coach-athlete interactions—a code of conduct. In fact, that is the direction that USA Gymnastics took and this organization has made great progress in developing a Code of Ethics to better serve those who participate in gymnastics.

There are many obvious obstacles and resistances that interfere with the development and subsequent adoption of a code of ethics and behavior. One basic difficulty is that not many coaches like to talk about the subject. It is not just that they see it as an infringement on their autonomy and right to manage their own functioning, but also because some of the content is sensitive. Issues that present clear ethical dilemmas are touchy subjects for many coaches. They would prefer to deny the existence of such problems, even knowing that they are out there.

A major contradiction concerning a code of ethics is that sport is often seen through a different set of moral lenses than those used in the rest of our lives. For example, in years past some of us have seen gymnastic coaches treat their athletes in ways that, outside of the training setting, would be grounds for dismissal if not a civil or criminal lawsuit. What to some is acceptable in the gym might not be outside of that setting. Does this mean the behavior in the training setting is above the law in terms of what is right and ethical? Many more athletes participating in sport today are sensitive to the issues of abusive, demeaning, humiliating, or degrading actions of their coaches. A larger than hoped for number of coaches uses the gym as a place to work out their own personal problems around authority and control. These personalized agendas usually involving themes of domination are used to abuse the power the coach has by virtue of their positions and role. A loss of objectivity can often occur and contribute directly to emotional damage in a young gymnast who sometimes holds the coach as a special person and even god-like figure. A code of conduct goes a long way in illuminating what can be expected and accepted by everyone.

Since many coach’s livelihoods depend on production and performance of their athletes, it is understandable that they might tend, to some degree, to take advantage of their student’s time and physical well-being. Safety has always been stressed in gymnastics, but we are all aware of the fact that far too many coaches go for the big “tricks” prematurely, without preparation, in order to produce a winning team. A code of ethics also addresses the issue of over-emphasis on winning to the long range detriment of the gymnast. When it is a question of keeping your job, some resistance to looking at this question is to be expected. Again, however, is that an ethical point of view?

Seven basic attributes have been identified that athletes between the ages of 12 and 20 look for in their coaches. It is suggested that priority by the coach should be in developing positive and helpful relationships with their athletes. Our own research over the years with competitive gymnasts here and abroad has revealed similar findings. These attributes will be discussed in this paper from the perspective of the sport of gymnastics.

Coaching Attributes

Competence. Research has clearly shown that most athletes want coaches who know their business. This not only means technical, biomechanically-based knowledge, but also the ability to communicate this information to them in a clear and useful manner. It is of interest, in this regard, to note that a questionnaire format survey, conducted by your authors involving hundreds of gymnasts, the less successful athletes felt that “technical ability” was the single most important attribute in a coach. The ability to provide “spotting” was also identified with the competence variable. More successful and experienced gymnasts as determined by actual competitive performance and record placed far less emphasis on this characteristic and indicated that the empathetic, emotionally supportive qualities of a coach were more highly valued. The question was raised, at that time, whether a partial key to outstanding coaching involves the coach’s ability to grow and change in keeping with the changing needs structure of an athlete. Obviously rigid, set-in-their-way coaches might have difficulty when such flexibility is needed. This issue has not been adequately examined to date and remains an intriguing question, with many ramifications for professional coaches and program development.
Approachability. Another important identified attribute involves the gymnast’s desire to have a coach who is open to what they think, say, and feel. They also look for coaches who can handle feedback about their coaching style, without becoming defensive, and who have the capacity to admit to mistakes. Many gymnasts have indicated that they often do not communicate with their coaches because they feel their concerns will be invalidated. Two of the most common examples involved the gymnast’s reluctance to tell the coach that they are afraid of a skill and do not feel ready to execute it in the demanded way, or that they are hurting with some physical injury. Many have stated that the coach often denies the crucial emotional message in these kinds of statements and will respond with “What are you afraid of?,” “so what,” “that’s foolish,” “cut it out,” or “you’re faking it.” Such a style, on the coach’s part, makes it most difficult for a gymnast to “trust” that they will be heard, and many would rather not risk enduring the coach’s anger. In terms of being able to admit to having made a mistake, a coach who says to an athlete, “Look, my behavior yesterday was out of line. I’m sorry,” will gain returns in personal credibility and in establishing the human qualities of the coach that few other actions could achieve.
Fairness and Consistency. This dimension of the coaching interaction is one of the most difficult to maintain. Most coaches, although they may wish to deny it, have “favorite” athletes in the gym. Their preference may be subtle, but it is detectable in any training setting and sometimes is glaring. Gymnasts, as with other athletes, expect and should receive equal treatment. Rules should apply to everyone, and although individual differences need to be taken into account, athletes should expect that approaches to the unique needs and characteristics of each gymnast will be addressed in a timely fashion and does not automatically mean unfairness. All athletes should receive such sensitive and individually tailored management, not just a select few. A code of ethics would need to discuss this area in detail.
Confidence. Gymnasts want to know they can rely on the coach to set a positive example, both in and out of the training setting. Athletes look for a clear set of guiding principles that focus on the overall long and short term goals of the coach in relationship to the team as a whole, and its individual members. Many of the rules and disciplinary expectations that apply to the gymnast should also be evident in the coach’s behavior and personal standards. Practice what you preach is associated with this kind of coaching characteristic and must be viewed as an ethical guideline.
Motivation. Another basic attribute sought by athletes in their coaches that has ethical implications involved motivation. There are basically two types of motivation: extrinsic and intrinsic. External motivation concerns stimulation that comes from outside the gymnast. Pleasing the coach or family members, concrete rewards for success, etc. are examples of extrinsic motivation. Internally motivated athletes find their drive in more personal factors such as pride, the acquisition of skills, and demonstrated mastery. Rarely is a gymnast purely one or the other in terms of a motivating force, but as with most athletes, motivation is usually sustained by a combination of outside and inside factors. If it is the ethical responsibility of the coach to serve as a motivator, then it is crucial that he or she have a great deal of enthusiasm and love for the sport. This kind of dedication and excitement in the coach is contagious and serves as a very powerful and basic motivational technique. In this regard, passion for the support is ethical.
Personal Concern. Most gymnasts and athletes, in general, want a coach who is genuinely concerned about their overall well-being as people, not just as motor wonders. Sometimes the coach serves as an adult friend and mentor as well as someone who directs the physical training of an athlete. Many young people want to be able to confide in their coach and ask questions without being treated as an inferior. Mutual respect, in this regard, is highly advantageous. At times of injury, this principle becomes very clear, and often young athletes are ignored or abandoned on some level when they can no longer “compete” and make an active contribution to a team. Such behavior on the part of a coach is not right and is, in fact, unethical.
Support. Gymnasts want coaches who encourage and also who demand that they go for the maximum realization of their individual potential. They are looking for coaches who instill security and confidence. All athletes want coaches who will recognize and praise their achievements and constructively deal with their weaknesses and areas for needed improvement. Coaching through the overt use of fear, intimidation, and domination is counterproductive and not ethical.

Adopting a “Personal” Code of Conduct

In summary, although progress has been made by several sport federations to develop a strict code of ethics, many do not involve the type of desired characteristics nor coach-athlete relationship issues just reviewed. The code of ethics for gymnastics addresses issues such as motivational or training methods which may be considered abusive, has established guidelines for all registered coaches and gymnastics facilities, and continues to monitor and update their ethical code. However, based on the previous seven attributes of competence, approachability, fairness, confidence, motivation, personal concern, and support perhaps we, in the gymnastic community, should strive towards adopting these additional desired characteristics as our own “personal” code of conduct. Refer to “Abuses of Anger in the Gym,” “Male Coach-Female Gymnast,” as well as “I Have a Problem with My Coach” found in Psychology and Gymnastics for a more in-depth look at this important issue.

Works Cited

Massimo, J. & Massimo, S., (2012). “Abuses of Anger in the Gym,” in Psychology and Gymnastics, NY, NY: Morgan James.

Massimo, J. & Massimo, S., (2012). “Male Coach-Female Gymnast,” in Psychology and Gymnastics, NY, NY: Morgan James.

Massimo, J. &. Massimo, S., (2012). Psychology and Gymnastics. NY, NY: Morgan James.

Nielsen, W., (1994). “Ethics,” in Olympic Coach: U.S. Olympic Committee Division of Coaching Development, Winter 1994, Volume 4, Number 1.

USA Gymnastics Code of Ethics. October, 2011. http://usagym.org/pages/aboutus/pages/code_of_ethics.html