Who Holds the System Together? Care, Character, and the Moral Load of Junior Sport

/

Junior sport is often discussed as a development system; a place where skills are learned, talent is identified, and pathways are navigated. Less often is it described for what it increasingly is: a care system. Every week, junior sport relies on adults to manage emotions, translate disappointment, mediate conflict, protect wellbeing, and model values. These tasks are rarely formalised, yet they are central to whether young people feel safe, motivated, and willing to stay. If sport is held together by care, who is carrying that load….and at what cost?

Care work in junior sport is largely invisible. It appears in the volunteer coach who absorbs parental frustration, the parent who reframes selection disappointment on the drive home, or the administrator who quietly manages safeguarding concerns. Sociologically, this mirrors broader patterns of moral and emotional labour….work that sustains systems but is rarely recognised or rewarded (Hochschild, 1983). When junior sport functions smoothly, care is assumed; when it fractures, individuals are blamed. What happens when the labour that holds sport together becomes unsustainable?

Volunteer coaches sit at the centre of this moral economy. Research consistently shows that most junior sport coaching is delivered by unpaid adults motivated by altruism, community connection, and personal meaning (Cuskelly et al., 2006). Yet contemporary expectations have expanded dramatically. Coaches are now asked to be technicians, mentors, safeguarders, administrators, and emotional regulators….often simultaneously. When roles expand without support, burnout becomes likely. If goodwill is treated as infinite, why are we surprised when it runs out?

Self-Determination Theory offers a useful lens here. Coaches are more likely to persist when their basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness are supported (Ryan & Deci, 2017). However, increased surveillance, fear of complaint, and prescriptive programming can erode all three. Coaches report feeling constrained in decision-making, uncertain in their competence, and relationally exposed to conflict (Hancock et al., 2018). When the role undermines the very needs that sustain motivation, what remains to keep people engaged?

Safeguarding frameworks have rightly become central to junior sport governance, yet they also reshape the moral load placed on individuals. Policies often position coaches as primary custodians of safety, while offering limited relational or emotional support (Kerr et al., 2020). Trauma-informed perspectives remind us that safety is not only procedural but experiential; young people must feel secure, predictable, and respected to develop (Brunzell et al., 2016). Can systems be considered safe if those delivering care feel unsupported and fearful?

Parents, too, are drawn into this moral labour. Beyond logistical support, parents help children interpret success, failure, and belonging (Knight et al., 2017). Their reactions signal whether sport is a place of unconditional growth or conditional approval. Yet parents themselves navigate conflicting messages….encouraged to be involved but criticised for overstepping, expected to trust systems that are often opaque. If parents are moral translators for young athletes, how clear are the values they are translating?

These dynamics intersect with character development in complex ways. Junior sport frequently claims to build character, yet character is shaped less by slogans than by lived norms. Moral psychology suggests that ethical behaviour is strongly influenced by context and perceived expectations (Bandura, 1999). When adults feel pressured, exhausted, or unsupported, ethical shortcuts become more likely; not through malice, but through survival. If moral drift is structural rather than individual, where should responsibility sit?

The concept of moral atmosphere is helpful here. Moral atmosphere refers to the shared norms that govern what is acceptable within a group (Kohlberg, 1984). In junior sport, this atmosphere is shaped by how conflict is handled, how mistakes are treated, and whose voices are prioritised. When adults model empathy, reflection, and accountability, young people learn that values matter. When adults are overwhelmed, values become negotiable. What kind of moral climate emerges from chronic strain?

Volunteer coach attrition provides a visible symptom of this strain. Studies show that coaches leave not primarily due to time demands, but because of emotional exhaustion, role conflict, and lack of appreciation (Hancock et al., 2018). Each departure removes not just a worker, but a relational anchor within the community. When turnover becomes normalised, continuity suffers, and care becomes fragmented. How resilient can junior sport be without stable adult presence?

At an organisational level, many clubs respond by focusing on recruitment rather than retention….lowering entry barriers or fast-tracking accreditation. While pragmatic, this approach treats volunteers as replaceable rather than relationally embedded. Research on communities of practice suggests that mentoring, shared responsibility, and reflective spaces are far more effective in sustaining engagement (Nelson et al., 2013). If care is collective, why is it so often carried individually?

The cumulative effect of these pressures is moral drift. As systems stretch thin, small compromises become routine: overlooking exclusion, prioritising results, or tolerating behaviour that contradicts stated values. Over time, these compromises reshape culture. Young athletes notice which actions are rewarded and which concerns are minimised. If character is learned through observation, what lessons are being absorbed?

Importantly, this drift does not require bad actors. Most adults in junior sport care deeply about young people. Drift emerges when structural pressures outpace reflective capacity. Time scarcity, fear of scrutiny, and competitive anxiety crowd out moral deliberation. Recognising this shifts the conversation from blame to design. If systems create the conditions for drift, can they also create conditions for care?

Rebalancing the moral load of junior sport requires intentional redistribution. Safeguarding, inclusion, and wellbeing cannot sit solely with volunteer coaches. Clear role boundaries, shared decision-making, and organisational accountability are essential. When care is recognised as core work rather than invisible labour, it becomes possible to support it properly. What would junior sport look like if care was treated as infrastructure rather than goodwill?

There are promising signs. Trauma-informed coaching models emphasise predictability, voice, and relational trust (Brunzell et al., 2016). Positive youth development frameworks highlight the importance of supportive relationships and moral reasoning (Holt et al., 2017). These approaches align with what many coaches already value, yet struggle to sustain under pressure. How might systems amplify what works rather than overwhelm it?

Ultimately, junior sport is not held together by policies, pathways, or participation numbers alone. It is held together by people….by adults willing to care, correct, and commit. When those people are stretched beyond capacity, the system frays. Asking who holds junior sport together is not a rhetorical question; it is a practical one with moral consequences. If care collapses, what remains?

References:

  • Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193–209.

  • Brunzell, T., Stokes, H., & Waters, L. (2016). Trauma-informed flexible learning. International Journal of Child, Youth and Family Studies, 7(2), 218–239.

  • Cuskelly, G., Taylor, T., Hoye, R., & Darcy, S. (2006). Volunteer management practices and retention. Sport Management Review, 9(2), 141–163.

  • Hancock, D. J., Allen, J. B., & Côté, J. (2018). Coach burnout in youth sport. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 30(1), 1–16.

  • Hochschild, A. R. (1983). The managed heart. University of California Press.

  • Holt, N. L., Neely, K. C., Slater, L. G., et al. (2017). Positive youth development through sport. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 39(1), 1–15.

  • Kerr, G., Willson, E., & Stirling, A. (2020). Maltreatment in sport. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 35(21–22), 1–23.

  • Knight, C. J., Berrow, S. R., & Harwood, C. G. (2017). Parenting in youth sport. Current Opinion in Psychology, 16, 93–97.

  • Kohlberg, L. (1984). The psychology of moral development. Harper & Row.

  • Nelson, L. J., Cushion, C. J., & Potrac, P. (2013). Communities of practice in coaching. Sports Coaching Review, 2(2), 79–91.

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory. Guilford Press.