In the world of university sport, trust is everything. Student athletes put their faith in coaches, team mates, and institutions that promise to protect them. But what happens when that trust is betrayed, not by strangers, but by the very systems meant to keep them safe?
The Ohio State University sexual abuse scandal stands as one of the darkest chapters in collegiate sport. In the span of 20 years, team doctor Richard Strauss is alleged to have abused at least 177 male students – athletes who went to him for medical care and received anything but that. Complaints were raised repeatedly, yet the University failed to act decisively. For decades, survivors carried the weight of silence, while Strauss remained in his position, protected by institutional inaction.
A recent documentary has reignited public attention, exposing not only the scale of abuse but also the culture that allowed it to happen. The phrase that echoes through survivor testimonies – “We were powerless” – captures the essence of the scandal: a system where authority overshadowed accountability, and where the voices of student athletes were ignored.
For universities worldwide, including here in the UK, the Ohio State case serves as a devastating reminder that safeguarding is not a box-ticking exercise; it is a moral imperative. When power dynamics in sport go unchecked, abuse can thrive – not only physical, but also emotional and psychological.
At the student level, these dynamics can feel invisible but are deeply present. Many student athletes train and compete in environments where coaches, administrators, or physiotherapists hold significant influence over their success. The pressure to perform, to stay on a team, or, in the US, to secure scholarships can make speaking up feel impossible. The Ohio State survivors’ experiences mirror what many students fear today: that raising concerns could end a season, or a career.
So what can universities do differently?
First, safeguarding policies must go beyond the policy handbook. They must be visible, accessible, and enforced. Every athlete should know where to turn, who to trust, and how to report misconduct safely without fear of retaliation.
Secondly, universities must cultivate a culture of listening. Too often, institutions prioritise reputation management over transparency. Regular safeguarding audits, anonymous reporting systems, and survivor-informed training can shift that balance.
Finally, student athletes themselves must be empowered to take part in shaping safeguarding culture. Creating athlete-led advocacy groups or mental health support within sports clubs ensures that protection is not only top-down but peer driven.
The Ohio State scandal should never have happened. But its legacy can and must serve as a catalyst for change. When universities choose to hear athletes rather than silence them, they redefine what sport stands for: not just competition, but community, care, and courage.
Thankfully, here in York we’re supported by incredible safeguarding systems that prioritise student welfare – ensuring athletes are well informed, empowered to speak up, and, above all, believed.
University of York students can also access support via Open Doors.