Diagnosed at just three years old with respiratory disease, Megan underwent more than 140 surgeries by the age of 18. The rare condition affected her breathing and left her speaking in a whisper—but it didn’t stop her from becoming a competitive figure skater, making it all the way to the senior level.

When her health eventually forced her away from the sport, Megan says she struggled with the loss of the identity, structure and community that had defined much of her life. That experience ultimately led her to become a physical therapist and strength coach—and to create the Former Athlete Boot Camp, a program designed to fill a void she says she desperately needed herself, and that sport still desperately needs: helping athletes navigate their physical and emotional transition to life after competition.

In this conversation, Megan talks about overcoming extraordinary health challenges, what happens when an athlete suddenly loses the sport that has defined them, and why coaches and sport organizations need to see the person before the athlete.

And while Megan may speak in a whisper, she has a loud message about how sport can do so much more to prepare athletes for what comes next.

Interviews in the Broken Ice: On The Right Edge summer series will be freely accessible to everyone, with no paywall or subscription required thanks to a generous supporter who wishes to remain anonymous. Their donation reflects a shared belief that these conversations should be accessible to the entire sport community.

Share

Know someone making an impact in sport? A coach creating a healthier training environment, an athlete advocating for change, a volunteer who has dedicated years to the sport—or even the local Zamboni driver who always goes the extra mile to make the rink a welcoming place.

I’d love to hear their story. Send me a message at tips@brokenice.ca

Dixon is a former figure skater herself and has worked with many of the top skaters including world pairs champion Meagan Duhamel and Canadian champion Kirsten Moore-Towers. She has seen firsthand the challenges athletes face at every level. In this conversation, she shares how the struggles she experienced as a young skater inspired her to build the support system she wishes she’d had, and explains why mental training should be just as fundamental as physical training.

Interviews in the Broken Ice: On The Right Edge summer series will be freely accessible to everyone, with no paywall or subscription required thanks to a generous supporter who wishes to remain anonymous. Their donation reflects a shared belief that these conversations should be accessible to the entire sport community.

Share

Know someone making an impact in sport? A coach creating a healthier training environment, an athlete advocating for change, a volunteer who has dedicated years to the sport—or even the local Zamboni driver who always goes the extra mile to make the rink a welcoming place.

I’d love to hear their story. Send me a message at tips@brokenice.ca

As a former U.S. pair skater, two-time Olympian with Alice Cook and Lea Ann Miller, and coach, Fauver says he’s seen figure skating at both its best and its worst.
At a time when headlines continue to expose coaches accused of abuse and assault, he’s trying to shift the conversation from reacting to preventing harm. In this conversation, Fauver reflects on how coaching culture has changed, why he believes current SafeSport systems fall short, and why he created CoachFax, a new screening platform designed to help families identify coaches who meet a higher standard of trust and accountability—all in an effort to help protect the sport he loves.

Interviews in the Broken Ice: On The Right Edge summer series will be freely accessible to everyone, with no paywall or subscription required thanks to a generous supporter who wishes to remain anonymous. Their donation reflects a shared belief that these conversations should be accessible to the entire sport community.

Share

Know someone making an impact in sport? A coach creating a healthier training environment, an athlete advocating for change, a volunteer who has dedicated years to the sport—or even the local Zamboni driver who always goes the extra mile to make the rink a welcoming place.

I’d love to hear their story. Send me a message at tips@brokenice.ca

Dr. Jennifer Harris has made it her mission to change that. A researcher with a PhD focused on sport parent education, Harris has built a career helping families better navigate youth and elite sport. She is the creator of the Super P approach and recently launched The Crashmat Parent Substack and podcast, sharing practical, research-backed guidance for sport parents.

In this conversation, she explains why educating parents may be one of the most important—and most overlooked—ways to create healthier, safer sport, while offering practical advice every sport parent should hear before their child steps onto the ice, field or gym floor.

Interviews in the Broken Ice: On The Right Edge summer series will be freely accessible to everyone, with no paywall or subscription required thanks to a generous supporter who wishes to remain anonymous. Their donation reflects a shared belief that these conversations should be accessible to the entire sport community.

Share

Know someone making an impact in sport? A coach creating a healthier training environment, an athlete advocating for change, a volunteer who has dedicated years to the sport—or even the local Zamboni driver who always goes the extra mile to make the rink a welcoming place.

I’d love to hear their story. Send me a message at tips@brokenice.ca

Interviews in the Broken Ice: On The Right Edge summer series will be freely accesible to everyone, with no paywall or subscription required thanks to a generosus supporter who wishes to remain anonymous. The donation reflects a shared belief that these conversations should be accessible to the entire sport community.

Share

Know someone making an impact in sport? A coach creating a healthier training environment, an athlete advocating for change, a volunteer who has dedicated years to the sport—or even the local Zamboni driver who always goes the extra mile to make the rink a welcoming place.

I’d love to hear their story. Send me a message at tips@brokenice.ca

Investigative journalism often focuses on what went wrong. But I also believe it’s important to highlight the people asking better questions, sharing new ideas, and working toward solutions.

That’s why I created Broken Ice: On The Right Edge.

This new video interview series features in-depth conversations with athletes, coaches, researchers, and advocates inspiring positive change in figure skating and elite sport—from mental health and athlete wellbeing to SafeSport, coaching, sport parenting, and more.

Here’s a little preview:

Thanks to the generosity of a supporter who wishes to remain anonymous, every interview in the Broken Ice: On The Right Edge summer series will be freely accesible to everyone, with no paywall or subscription required. Their donation reflects a shared belief that these conversations should be accessible to the entire sport community.

Stay tuned, the first interview will be published next week.

Know someone making an impact in sport? A coach creating a healthier training environment, an athlete advocating for change, a volunteer who has dedicated years to the sport, or even the local Zamboni driver who always goes the extra mile to make the rink a welcoming place.

I’d love to hear their story. Send me a message at tips@brokenice.ca

Share Broken Ice

TRIGGER WARNING: This story deals with aggressive language, verbal & emotional abuse and suicidal ideation.

“You’re fat.”

“You’re ugly.”

“I’m going to kill you.”

“If you quit now, you’re going to let down your mother, your skating club, your whole F—ing territory.”

These are some of the words former Canadian national team ice dancer Liam Dougherty says he heard from a coach while training as a teenager.

Dougherty says the years of verbal and emotional abuse that he both experienced and witnessed contributed to lifelong mental health challenges, including depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation, and a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

Liam is now speaking out about what he sees as the hidden cost of elite sport: not one major incident, but years of normalized emotional abuse that left lasting psychological injuries long after the medals, rankings, and competitions were over. For years, he says he feared retribution from the skating community if he spoke publicly. Now, he wants others in the sport to understand that verbal and emotional abuse can leave deep and lasting scars — and that what is often dismissed as “tough coaching” can have consequences that last a lifetime.

The Opportunity of a Lifetime

Dougherty started skating when he was seven years old in Whitehorse, Yukon, a small city in Canada’s far north.

Throughout his 17 years of training, he had different coaches and experienced a variety of challenges and difficult situations. However, he says it was the verbal abuse that “rained down on us” from one coach in particular, Paul Wirtz, that really “broke” him.

Wirtz, a Canadian figure skating coach who trained numerous national and international-level athletes in the early 1990s and 2000s, died in 2006 and is therefore unable to respond to the allegations described by Dougherty. While I was not present for the incidents described by Dougherty, I trained under Wirtz for a short period during my own skating career and personally witnessed many of the coaching methods and behaviours he describes in this interview.

With limited summer training options in the Yukon, Dougherty spent two summers training in singles skating under Wirtz in Montreal.

Then, at age 13, he says he was given just 30 minutes by Wirtz to decide whether to leave home, move across the country, and begin training full-time in ice dance — a decision he now views as the first of many power plays by the coach.

Less than 24 hours later, he was on a plane to Montreal for what he thought was an “opportunity of a lifetime.”

Instead, he says he immediately entered an environment of fear and obedience.

“As soon as Paul came into the rink in the morning, everybody would line up,” Dougherty described. “He would go around one by one and say what was wrong with everybody. ‘You’re fat. Your thighs are too big. You can’t do your jumps. You’re stupid. You’re ugly.”

“It was terrifying.”

Dougherty says the yelling was constant and the threats routine.

“He would threaten us with death,” he said. “You better land this or else I’m going to kill you.”

As a teenager, Dougherty says the threats felt real because they were often accompanied by outbursts of anger.

“He’s throwing water bottles, skate guards, CD cases — anything he can grab,” Dougherty recalled. “I didn’t think he was going to murder us, but I wasn’t entirely sure what he would do.”

Watch Liam read from journals he kept as a teenager while training in Montreal and reflect on the lasting impact those experiences continue to have on his life nearly 30 years later.

The pressure wasn’t limited to performance.

Dougherty says athletes, particularly young girls in the rink, were regularly criticized about their bodies and weight.

“Your thighs are so f-ing fat, you’re never going to get a partner, you better stick your f-ing fingers down your throat,” he recalled, describing the atmosphere as one of “terror.”

But one moment stands out above all others.

Dougherty recalls arriving late to the ice one day and becoming the focus of one of Wirtz’s verbal attacks.

“He told me if I quit, I would let down my mother, my skating club, my whole territory.”

Today, Dougherty believes that moment fundamentally changed him.

“I think that was the most singularly important thing that happened to me,” he said. “I couldn’t imagine letting down my entire territory.”

Over time, Dougherty says skating became his entire identity.

“He told me very explicitly that your life is nothing outside of this sport. Your life is nothing outside of this rink.”

For years, he accepted that reality.

Life after Skating

Following his time training with Wirtz, Dougherty moved on to work with coaches more suited for ice dance. While Wirtz left the deepest mark, Dougherty says many of those coaches — most of whom are still actively coaching today — also relied on aggressive coaching techniques and contributed to a negative training environment.

Over the next decade, Dougherty skated with several partners and, by 2008, had finished fifth at the Canadian Championships.

Only two years away from the Olympic Games, he says he walked away from the sport “in disgust.”

At first, he thought leaving the sport would solve the problem. Instead, he says he felt abandoned by a system that had defined nearly every aspect of his life.

“You quit and you’re no longer serving any purpose for them,” Dougherty said. “And if you’re critical, well, now you’re really in trouble.”

He says there was little support available for athletes struggling after retirement, despite the emotional toll years of elite sport had already taken.

“There was absolutely no help when I quit skating, and I desperately needed it then,” he said.

Dougherty says the years that followed were “absolute hell,” marked by mental health struggles, massive depression, isolation, and eventually a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder.

“To just put it very succinctly, I wanted to kill myself,” he says. “And looking back, I cannot believe that participation in ice dance would lead me to want to end my life. It seems absolutely absurd, but that’s how I felt.”

Looking back now, Dougherty struggles to understand why no other adult ever stepped in to stop the verbal abuse and believes access to proper mental health support both during and after his career could have changed the course of those early post-training years for him.

“Now I’ve survived. I’ve managed. But back then I absolutely needed help, and I could have ended my life. I was closer than I ever want to be.”

Words Matter

Laura Collins, a Licensed Clinical Social Worker and athlete psychotherapist, says she is not at all shocked or surprised by what Dougherty experienced and that it is, “sadly, all too common.” A former elite gymnast and diver herself, Collins says stories like Dougherty’s are far from rare.

She says athletes, parents and even coaches continue to contact her with concerns about coaching behaviours that have become normalized in sport, often struggling to determine where demanding coaching ends and emotional abuse begins.

While awareness around athlete mental health has grown in recent years, Collins says sport is only beginning to understand the long-term impact of emotional and psychological abuse.

“The recognition of trauma in sports is still in its infancy,” she said. “It’s like an iceberg and we’re trying to scrape it with a tablespoon.”

Collins says the effects of verbal and emotional abuse by a coach can last long after an athlete leaves competition.

“When we experience things like put-downs, fear, stress and the feeling that we’re not good enough, that is going to deteriorate not only our mental health, but our physical health as well,” she said.

She rejects the notion that emotional abuse is somehow less harmful than other forms of maltreatment.

“One hundred percent,” Collins said when asked whether verbal and emotional abuse can be as damaging as physical or sexual abuse. “Athletes are human beings first.”

The impact, she says, can be profound and enduring.

“We can’t expect that what happens to athletes emotionally isn’t going to have an impact in the long term,” Collins said. “It’s all-encompassing, and it will last forever.”

Share

More Than Just Skating

Today, Dougherty says he is “surviving,” but still struggles with depression, anxiety and suicidal thoughts.

“I gave up, like Paul told me I should never do,” he said, describing the shame he still carries about leaving the sport.

“Unfortunately, since my 20s, when the symptoms of PTSD first appeared, it’s been an unbroken battle every day.”

He hopes sharing his story will help people understand that emotional abuse can leave lasting scars, even when there are no visible injuries.

“A coach’s words matter,” he stressed.

“This type of coaching does more to destroy the sport than it does to help it.”

For Dougherty, the issue goes far beyond figure skating. He believes coaches have a responsibility to understand the lasting impact their words can have on young athletes.

“You have to make sure that you’re not screaming at and dehumanizing children, because that’s what kills sports,” he said. “And it does more than that. It destroys people’s spirits. And for what? For ice dance? It seems so petty and ridiculous that we would allow coaches to threaten kids for something as immaterial as ice dance.”

You can watch the full conversation with Liam below and hear more about the culture that existed inside one of Canada's top training centres, the coaching behaviours he witnessed and experienced, and how he started training in ice dance partnered with a future Olympic medallist.

Read more

Broken Ice has learned that a Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada (SDRCC) Appeal Panel has ruled Abuse-Free Sport did not have jurisdiction to investigate the complaint against former Canadian champion and 2022 Olympian Nikolaj Sørensen at the time of its investigation into Ashley Foy’s allegation of a 2012 sexual assault. As a result, the Director of Sanctions and Outcomes decision “must be set aside,” upholding the earlier appeal decision that overturned the suspension previously imposed against Sørensen.

The ruling centred on the revised Universal Code of Conduct to Prevent and Address Maltreatment in Sport (UCCMS) consent form that was updated in 2024 to address historical conduct. The panel found that the complaint had already been filed and the investigation had already begun before Sørensen was required to sign the updated form, meaning Abuse-Free Sport lacked jurisdiction at the time they accepted the complaint and began the investigation.

Subscribe now

In April, Foy came forward in an interview with Broken Ice, revealing her identity and speaking publicly for the first time about both the alleged assault and her experience navigating Canada’s safe sport system, calling the complaint process “convoluted” and “not trauma-informed.”

Foy also told Broken Ice that when she filed the complaint with the Office of the Sport Integrity Commissioner (OSIC) in 2023, she believed jurisdiction had been clearly established.

She says OSIC took time to formally confirm jurisdiction, and said investigators repeatedly assured her in writing that the office did have authority to proceed.

“So at that point I thought at least the jurisdiction part of it was so crystal clear and done,” she said. “So I felt really safe reporting at that time because I knew I finally had a place to go where this would be taken seriously and looked into.”

According to OSIC’s official process, all complaints first undergo an “Initial Review and Preliminary Assessment” to determine whether the office has authority to proceed, whether the allegations could constitute a potential UCCMS violation, and whether provisional measures may be necessary.

Broken Ice requested a comment from the SDRCC and was told they could not comment because of confidentiality until all proceedings are completed and the file is closed.

Foy takes allegation to police

Broken Ice has also learned that Foy has filed a police report in Connecticut against Sørensen for the alleged assault.

Foy recently flew from her home in the Netherlands to the U.S. and formally filed a report regarding the allegation, more than a decade after the incident.

“I needed to do it for myself, for my own healing. To rewrite the ending to the night I almost died was empowering and meaningful,” she told Broken Ice.

In April, Foy explained why she did not go to police back in 2012, saying “I knew that if I had reported it, I would probably be saying goodbye to my career in figure skating.”

She said fears of being blacklisted and losing any future in the sport ultimately kept her from coming forward at the time.

“I decided ultimately it wasn’t worth it… and I got in the shower and cried,” she said.

For years she believed the statute of limitations had expired and she could no longer file a report. However, in April, she sought advice from a lawyer and learned there may still be a path forward under a legal exception known as tolling.

The tolling provision in Connecticut law states that if an accused person is not usually and publicly residing in the state, the time they are absent does not count toward the statute of limitations. In effect, the clock pauses while the person is out of state, and resumes if they return.

After speaking with officers in Connecticut last month, Foy says they informed her that the statute of limitations would not be tolled in her case because Sørensen was always supposed to leave the state and therefore the tolling provision would not apply. There will, however, be an official report kept on file.

“With it on the official record now, Sørensen likely won’t get away with a second rape in the US,” Foy said. “And I would do anything, even at the cost of my own health and finances, to protect anyone else from him.”

The Avon, Connecticut, Police Department confirmed to Broken Ice that a complaint was received and that, after consultation with the State’s Attorney, it was determined the statute of limitations for prosecution expired in 2017.

Sørensen has denied all allegations.

No criminal charges have been laid, and the claims have not been tested in court.

Foy says she is disappointed about not being able to move forward with the criminal case, given how challenging and expensive the whole process has been to this point.

She says she wishes she had a Connecticut-licensed lawyer to help her understand whether there are any remaining legal avenues available, but is now “saving any extra income I earn to hire a Canadian lawyer to right the wrongs of Skate Canada and the SDRCC.”

She says she cannot fully comment on the recent decision because of confidentiality clauses but disagrees with it, saying she now “must be further traumatized and invest my own money in this fight to see justice.”

She continued, “I wish after all the Canadian taxpayers’ millions spent on protecting athletes, they would have an efficient system in place, but they do not. I will keep fighting at all costs.”

Timeline of Events - Sørensen investigation

• April 21, 2012 - Alleged assault occurs at a condo party in Hartford, Connecticut.

• July 2023 - Complaint filed with the Office of the Sport Integrity Commissioner (OSIC).

• January 4, 2024 - USA TODAY reporter Christine Brennan breaks the story of the investigation.

• October 2024 - OSIC’s Director of Sanctions and Outcomes (DSO) rules that Sørensen engaged in sexual maltreatment and imposes an indefinite ineligibility sanction of at least six years.

• June 2025 - Following an appeal by Sørensen, an arbitrator overturns the suspension, ruling that OSIC lacked jurisdiction.

• December 2025 - Following an appeal by the Director of Sanctions and Outcomes (DSO), a panel rules that the earlier arbitrator’s decision was not reasonable and must be set aside.

• March 2026 - Following a new appeal by the DSO, a panel rules that Abuse-Free Sport did not have jurisdiction over the respondent at the time of the investigation and determines that the DSO decision must be set aside.

• March 27, 2026 - An Ontario Superior Court judge rules that the UCCMS can be applied retroactively in Canadian sport cases.

• April, 2026 - At the request of the DSO, the appeal panel considers the Ontario Superior Court ruling but determines its original decision will stand.

• June 2026 - The appeal panel rules that OSIC and Abuse-Free Sport should not have asserted retroactive jurisdiction and the DSO’s decision “remains vacated.”

  Full decsion from: https://crdsc-sdrcc.ca/resource_centre/pdf/English/1195_SDRCC%20SAT%2025-0004.pdf

  Share

Broken Ice has learned that Canadian figure skating coach Tyler Myles has filed another appeal with the Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada (SDRCC), this time arguing that bias in the original investigation process warrants a fresh hearing of his case.

Share

The appeal filed in May comes just two months after the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, in a challenge brought by Myles, ruled that the Universal Code of Conduct to Prevent and Address Maltreatment in Sport (UCCMS) can be applied retroactively to conduct that occurred before the code came into force. Myles had argued that the UCCMS — introduced nationally in 2022 — should not apply to conduct that allegedly occurred nearly two decades earlier.

Following the decision of the Ontario Superior Court, the case was set to return to the SDRCC Tribunal to determine the remaining issues in the appeal, including the merits of the findings and sanction.

Now, the focus has shifted from whether the UCCMS can be applied to historical conduct to whether the investigation that found Myles had committed Physical Maltreatment, Sexual Maltreatment, including Sexual Maltreatment of Minors, Boundary Transgressions, and Interference with or Manipulation of Process, itself was fair.

THE BIAS ARGUMENT

In reply submissions filed May 29 and obtained by Broken Ice, Myles’ lawyers argue that the OSIC investigator involved in the case was biased and are asking the arbitrator to allow the appeal to proceed as a “de novo hearing,” meaning the case would be heard afresh rather than relying on the previous findings.

The filing alleges the investigator, Maryse Séguin, was involved in two separate complaints against Myles and received information relevant to the second complaint while investigating the first.

Sources close to the case told Broken Ice that a complaint was first filed against Myles in February 2023. Following the investigation, Myles was declared permanently ineligible in February 2024.

A second complaint was filed in January 2024 by an individual who sources say had been interviewed as part of the first investigation. The two matters were later merged during the appeal process as Myles challenged the application of the UCCMS to historical conduct.

The appeal further alleges that the investigator “had a closed mind”, treated parties unequally, omitted exculpatory evidence, and failed to give him “a chance to respond to all the evidence and allegations.”

The Deputy Director of Sanctions and Outcomes (DDSO) argued that the decisions made by the investigator during both complaints were “reasonable and should be upheld.”

The SDRCC arbitrator will now rule on the preliminary issues and set out the next procedural steps.

That decision will determine whether the appeal proceeds on its merits and whether a new hearing will be ordered.

For now, this case, which was first filed less than a year after OSIC first began accepting complaints in 2022, remains unresolved, highlighting the lengthy path some complaints can take through investigations, appeals, and the courts.

UPDATE: After publication, the arbitrator issued a short decision on June 8 ruling that the appeal will proceed as a modified de novo hearing. Arbitrator Peter Lawless found that “the interests of justice” and the “relative lack of additional prejudice” made that approach appropriate.

Under the ruling, the investigator’s report will remain part of the evidence, but the parties will be free to challenge the weight given to it and present additional documentary and witness evidence. Full reasons for the decision will be provided as part of the final ruling in the case.

What do you think about this case? Let’s chat about it: brokenice.substack.com/chat

From gymnastics to artistic swimming, to diving and even Major League Baseball, sports across the Olympic and professional landscape have taken advantage of new technology over the years to incorporate real-time reviews and/or score inquiries into their systems.

Figure skating has also seen a major overhaul of its judging system, which now allows judges to use replay technology to score levels and evaluate the execution of elements. But it remains one of the only major judged sports where athletes or coaches themselves have virtually no ability to formally challenge a score or technical call in real time.

Following a 2025-26 season that saw more than its share of judging controversy — from a widely debated illegal element call in ice dance to a quad twist entered incorrectly as a triple — skaters and coaches are calling on the International Skating Union (ISU) to introduce a way to immediately inquire about or appeal potential scoring errors, with many telling Broken Ice they have actually been advocating for the change for years.

Despite growing frustration inside the sport, the ISU told Broken Ice that a Council meeting later this month will discuss rule changes and updates for next season. However, it stopped short of committing to any changes regarding score inquiries or appeals.

“The ISU continues to build on a robust judging and scoring framework, which is regularly reviewed and progressively developed through ongoing dialogue and close consultation,” an ISU spokesperson said.

“In parallel, the ISU is focused on providing officials with the appropriate tools, guidance, and support necessary to perform their duties at the highest level.”

Subscribe now

“The athletes have to have some agency”

Currently, the ISU rules state that “Protests against results are permitted only in the case of incorrect mathematical calculation. A wrong identification of an element or of a level of difficulty, although it results in a lower or higher score is not an incorrect mathematical calculation.”

Protests must be filed in writing with the Referee within 24 hours of the competition ending, along with a 100 Swiss Franc fee (approximately $175 CAD or $127 USD). The fee is refunded if the protest succeeds; otherwise, it is remitted to the ISU.

The referee can also correct errors if they become aware of a data input error prior to the awards ceremony or up to 24 hours after the awards ceremony for a mathematical error - even without a protest being filed.

“Field of play decisions” — such as scores or times (for speed skating) announced during competition — are considered final and cannot be reviewed or changed, except in limited cases involving successful formal protests, according to ISU rules.

Despite the written rules, International Ice Dance coach Carol Lane says protests are virtually impossible.

“It almost never happens., she said. “It’s very arcane…You trying to protest a call pretty much has no chance of success.”

Lane says she has repeatedly raised the issue of a score inquiry or challenge in real time for years.

“I’ve actually said this to multiple people at multiple times, including the ISU,” she told Broken Ice. “I think that we definitely need an athlete-centered protest system… The athletes have to have some agency. At the moment, they have none. And that’s not healthy.”

Lane envisions something similar to tennis challenges — one carefully limited protest per program.

In her proposal, a challenged element would be reviewed by an independent off-site technical panel that would only see the isolated element in question.

“At the moment the system is entirely set up to show that the officials are always right and the athletes and coaches are always wrong,” she said. “And that’s not true. Sometimes it’s true… But it would at least give you some control because right now there’s none.”

Lane acknowledged that officials already work under enormous pressure. Still, she says, errors happen regularly — and there is often no remedy.

She recalled one of her teams receiving Level 3 on a spin they had consistently earned Level 4 for all season.

After the event, Lane reviewed the video with a technical controller.

“She went, ‘Yeah, you’re right, our mistake, sorry,’” Lane recalled. “But then there was nothing to do about it afterwards. There is nothing to do about it because it’s ‘field of play’ (and) that mark can cost you ten places.”

“The audience would love it”

Two-time World pairs champion Meagan Duhamel says she has been advocating for the sport to adopt an inquiry system similar to gymnastics for years to “anyone and everyone who would listen,” including federations, judges and coaches.

In gymnastics, when a score inquiry is submitted, it is typically indicated publicly on the scoreboard so athletes, coaches and spectators know a review is underway.

But Duhamel wants to go even further — making the review process itself part of the live event experience, with replays and decisions shown in real time on the arena jumbotron for fans to follow along.

“If the skater and coach wins the appeal, the audience would love it. And then if the officials win the appeal? The audience would love that too. They’d be like, boo!” she laughed. “I think it’d be so entertaining.”

“No one in the skating world feels like that’s a no-go,” Duhamel said when asked whether people oppose a challenge system. “Everyone thinks there should be something.”

“Reality of fairness”

Few people explain figure skating rules and scoring more meticulously than Jackie Wong, founder of Rocker Skating and better known as the “Chief Skate Nerd.”

Wong says the issue ultimately comes down to balancing fairness with practicality.

“There’s a fine line between providing the opportunity for review and the potential for people gaming the systems by asking for too many reviews or asking for reviews frivolously. It’s great in theory, but could be unruly in practice,” he told Broken Ice.

Wong also stressed the importance of timing and the impact it could have on the event itself, suggesting reviews could potentially happen after the segment is complete or during ice resurfacing, rather than after the actual performance in question.

Still, like Lane, Wong says the current system leaves athletes without meaningful agency.

“It is of utmost importance to have everything called correctly,” he said. “But it’s also about agency and both the perception and the reality of fairness.”

“The Cost of doing Business”

Broken Ice also spoke to many current and former skaters — many anonymously — who all absolutely believed there should be some mechanism to inquire or appeal a score before the event is complete, while many also acknowledged the difficulty of officiating a fast-moving and deeply subjective sport.

In response to their concerns, the ISU told Broken Ice that “Discussion and debate around decisions made on the field of play are a natural part of sport, and Figure Skating is no exception given its inherent complexity, combining technical assessment with a significant artistic component.”

They added that the ISU “places strong importance on the perspectives of skaters, Members, and the wider ice-skating community in continuously refining its competition and event processes.”

Lane, who has also trained as a technical specialist, stressed that officials already work under enormous pressure, calling it a “hellish job,” as it has become increasingly more difficult as the scoring system grows more complicated each year.

“Everybody agrees” she said in summing up the need for an inquiry or appeal system.

“Everybody in the sport has suffered from that at one time or another. And you kind of accept it as the cost of doing business.”

What do you think?

Share

Two-time world pairs champion and coach Meagan Duhamel has been suspended by Skate Canada for two weeks for “bullying and harassment” of another coach.

The two-week suspension follows a complaint filed by another coach through Skate Canada’s Skate-Safe reporting system in November 2025.

Update: Duhamel Responds

Meagan Duhamel told Broken Ice: “I’m aware of a recent disciplinary outcome that has been made public. I acknowledge and take responsibility for my reaction. I also believe deeply in accountability, fairness and athlete safety.”

Her lawyers have advised her not to comment further on the details of the complaint.

Share

However, sources close to the situation told Broken Ice the complaint relates to an on-ice confrontation at Skate Oakville in the fall of 2025, where Duhamel confronted another coach over an alleged inappropriate relationship involving her husband — who was also coaching at Skate Oakville at the time. Skaters and parents were present during the incident.

Following the incident, Skate Oakville sent an email to members acknowledging the situation and asking members to refrain from discussing it publicly.

The coach confronted by Duhamel later filed the complaint through Skate Canada’s Skate-Safe reporting system.

According to the decision, Duhamel’s conduct amounted to “psychological maltreatment within the meaning of the UCCMS” and was therefore deemed a breach. The UCCMS, is The Universal Code of Conduct to Prevent and Address Maltreatment in Sport in Canada. The code is used to address and investigate abuse, harassment, bullying and other misconduct in federally funded sport.

Skate-Safe uses independent investigators to examine and investigate complaints and provide findings to Skate-Safe representatives, who then determine the appropriate disciplinary action — in this case, a two-week “suspension of membership.”

Thanks for reading Broken Ice and supporting independent journalism. If you found this story valuable, please share it with others and consider leaving a tip via Buy me Coffee.

Buy Me a Coffee

For nearly three years, the case involving Canadian Olympic ice dancer Nikolaj Sørensen has made headlines around the world.

Sørensen was accused of sexually assaulting an American figure skating coach and former skater in Connecticut in 2012.

In 2024, an investigation by the Office of the Sport Integrity Commissioner (OSIC) concluded that he had “engaged in Sexual Maltreatment” and imposed an indefinite period of ineligibility of at least six years

That ban was overturned by an arbitrator in June 2025 on appeal, and the matter is currently still being argued before a tribunal at the Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada (SDRCC). A final decision is pending.

Sørensen denies all allegations. In October 2025, his lawyers told Broken Ice they have “consistently maintained that he is innocent of the plaintiff’s allegations.” The allegations have not been tested in court.

The story has unfolded through investigations, multiple legal challenges, and public debate — raising broader questions about accountability, the complaint process, and culture in figure skating.

All without the survivor at its center ever being publicly identified.

That changes today.

In this Broken Ice exclusive, the survivor is speaking publicly for the first time — revealing her identity and sharing her account of what she says happened to her, the pressures that kept her silent, and the toll of navigating a years-long complaint process.

She has also launched a charity called Just Ice No Abuse, where she is hoping to help other survivors navigate the reporting process and access legal support.

Share

The full 36-minute interview is available to paid subscribers above 👆🏻.

*Editor’s Note: In this interview, the speaker refers to Sport Integrity Canada in connection with her case. For clarity, the investigation was conducted by the Office of the Sport Integrity Commissioner (OSIC), and subsequent proceedings have taken place through the Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada (SDRCC). Sport Integrity Canada took over the administration of the Safe Sport code in late 2025. They were not involved in this case.

Read more

An Ontario court ruling in the case of figure skating coach Tyler Myles confirms that Canada’s national safe sport code can be applied to alleged misconduct dating back years before it was enacted — with implications far beyond a single case.

In a decision released by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, the court determined that the framework can be used to assess allegations against Myles from 2005.

The ruling clears a critical legal hurdle, one that could shape how abuse cases across Canadian sport are investigated and adjudicated moving forward.

Subscribe now

The case against Tyler Myles

Tyler Myles was a former competitive figure skater. He began coaching in 2005 in Alberta.

The case stems from allegations dating back to 2005, when Myles was accused of inappropriate conduct involving underage athletes, including providing alcohol, exposing them to pornography, and sharing a bed with them.

An investigation filed in 2023 with the Office of the Sport Integrity Commissioner (OSIC) found the allegations substantiated. Myles was also found to have attempted to interfere with the investigative process, a violation in itself.

In February 2024, Deputy Director of Sanctions and Outcomes David Kellerman determined that Myles had violated the Universal Code of Conduct to Prevent and Address Maltreatment in Sport (UCCMS) and declared him permanently ineligible to participate with Skate Canada.

Myles appealed that decision in March 2024, arguing that the UCCMS — introduced nationally in 2022 — should not apply to conduct that allegedly occurred nearly two decades earlier.

In May 2024, an arbitrator at the Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada (SDRCC) ruled that the code could apply.

The arbitrator found that the UCCMS was designed to “ensure protection of the sporting public” and “is a forward looking or prospective code that’s purpose…is to safeguard sport participants into the future.” He further noted that it is “as distinct from seeking to punish offenders for past conduct.”

Myles subsequently brought that issue before the Superior Court.

What Myles Told the Court

In a sworn affidavit submitted as part of his appeal and obtained exclusively by Broken Ice, Myles argued that the rules and expectations governing coach-athlete conduct in 2005 were different from those imposed under today’s UCCMS framework.

He maintained that applying modern standards to past behaviour was fundamentally unfair.

“I do not believe that it is fair for me to be sanctioned for actions that allegedly occurred in the past (which I deny) when there were no rules in place at the time prohibiting such conduct and there was no training in the time for coaches regarding such matters,” he wrote.

He continued:

“When I first started coaching, there were very little in the way of rules and regulations. There was no such thing as “safe sport”, as it is now known. Coaches regularly socialized with their athletes, attended sanctioned Skate Canada receptions together (where alcohol was served)...Many figure skating coaches had personal relationships with their athletes.”

“As a result of the changing standards and as I gained experience as a coach, I have erected boundaries around myself to ensure that I maintain strictly professional relationships with my skaters…Today, I would never invite any of my young athletes to attend at my house for a party where alcohol is served, as is alleged in the subject complaint.”

The affidavit also outlines the personal impact he said the case had had on him, including the loss of his coaching career and the broader reputational and financial consequences he says he has faced since the allegations surfaced.

“My life has been upended as a result of this matter. I am emotionally harmed, isolated from my figure skating community and unable to coach at Skate Canada sanctioned events, at Skate Canada sanctioned clubs or at any international competitive events.”

The Courts Ruling

Justice Charles Hackland found that the SDRCC arbitrator “made no error of law,” relying on established Canadian legal principles that new rules are generally presumed to apply only going forward — particularly where they impose new penalties for past actions. However, the court emphasized a key exception: when a rule is designed to protect the public, rather than punish past behaviour, it may be applied to historical conduct.

Applying that framework, the court found that the UCCMS can extend to events occurring before its enactment, agreeing that it is “a forward looking” code aimed at safeguarding participants in sport, rather than simply punishing wrongdoing after the fact.

The court also pointed to the structure of Canada’s safe sport system itself, noting that participation in federally funded sport now requires individuals to agree to the UCCMS. That agreement creates a contractual framework — one that supports the review of past conduct when determining present eligibility.

In Myles’ case, the broader system — including the UCCMS, Abuse-Free Sport program, and signatory agreements — was found to support jurisdiction over allegations that predate the code.

In addressing the fairness argument, the court emphasized that the conduct at issue — sexual maltreatment involving minors — was never acceptable in sport or outside of it, regardless of when it occurred, stating plainly that “sexual abuse of minors was never acceptable and can never be tolerated.”

Next steps

Myles had until April 13, 2026, to appeal the judge’s decision, and, according to the SDRCC, their counsel has no knowledge of an appeal being filed. The matter will now return to the SDRCC Tribunal, where the remainder of the appeal — including the merits of the findings and sanction — will resume.

There are also developments outside the sport system.

Sources have told Broken Ice that the Montreal Police Service is currently investigating the allegations of misconduct against Myles.

When asked for confirmation, the Montreal Police Service told Broken Ice that with a few exceptions, they do not confirm if a person is the subject of a complaint or investigation and “do not comment on ongoing investigations, so as not to interfere with their progress.”

No criminal charges have been laid to date.

Broken Ice reached out to Myles’ lawyer, Erin Durant, for comment on the court’s decision. She said she would not make any statements and told Broken Ice that she is no longer handling the case and has transitioned the client to lawyer Julia Wilkes as a result.

Ms. Wilkes did not respond to a request from Broken Ice for comment.

Share

A “Big Win for Safe Sport”

Former CEO of the SDRCC, Marie-Claude Asselin, called the decision a “big win for safe sport.” Asselin was a witness in the appeal before leaving the organization in September 2025 and does not currently represent the organization.

She stressed that the decision could have broader implications beyond a single case, as provinces, territories, and sport organizations worldwide continue to build out their safe sport systems — adding that “endorsing the goal to ‘protect sport’ (rather than to punish offenders) is fundamental to the success of any safe sport program.”

This decision lands at a defining moment for safe sport in Canada. The ruling itself noted that both sides agreed the issue was significant enough to warrant court review — citing “a public interest” given the SDRCC’s ongoing role in adjudicating complaints related to the UCCMS.

That role is already being tested. Among the cases still moving through the system is that of former Canadian ice dancer Nikolaj Sørensen, who is also challenging his suspension in part on the basis of whether the UCCMS can be applied to past conduct.

In that context, the court’s decision does more than resolve a single legal question — it reinforces the authority of Canada’s centralized safe sport system to investigate and act on allegations, even when they date back years or decades.

At the same time, it underscores the tension at the heart of these cases: between evolving standards designed to better protect athletes, and arguments from respondents who say they are being judged by rules that did not exist at the time.

In what could prove to be a landmark decision, a Florida appeals court has upheld the dismissal of a civil lawsuit against the French Federation of Ice Sports, for its alleged role in the sexual abuse case of French skater Morgan Ciprès, reinforcing the use of Foreign Sovereign Immunity (FSIA) to shield a national sports body from litigation in the United States.

In a brief decision issued by Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal, the court affirmed the lower court’s ruling—bringing the case against the French Federation of Ice Sports (FFSG) to an end.

In response to the court’s ruling, the survivor’s lawyer, Jennifer Winegardner, told Broken Ice, “what we wrote in our brief is what we stand by—and the court didn’t agree with us.”

Winegardner argued the Federation’s U.S.-based activities meant it should be held accountable in court and required to stand trial.

The civil case named both the FFSG and Morgan Ciprès, and will now proceed to trial against Ciprès in January 2027.

A Case That Never Reached Trial

The civil lawsuit, filed in Florida in 2021 by the survivor known as Jane Doe, raised questions about the role and responsibility of the French Federation.

As previously reported by Broken Ice, the case stems from allegations dating back to 2017, when former French pairs champion Morgan Ciprès, who was 26 years old at the time, allegedly sent explicit images to a then 13-year-old skater he trained with and coached at a rink in Florida.

Jane Doe accused the FFSG of negligence for its alleged role in enabling the abuse and attempting to “cover it up.”

Doe states in the lawsuit that the “FFSG and its American coaches knew Ciprès had a history of sexually exploiting a young skater and posed a danger if left unsupervised with minors.” The lawsuit further claims that “despite this knowledge, FFSG did nothing to warn Doe or her family and failed to supervise or restrict Ciprès’ interactions with her.”

As a result of the FSIA ruling, those allegations will not be tested in court.

Instead, it turned on a threshold legal issue: whether the court even had jurisdiction to hear it.

The French Federation argued it did not—invoking the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.

Subscribe now

How FSIA Works—and Why It Decided This Case

The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, or FSIA, limits when foreign state entities can be sued in U.S. courts—unless specific exceptions apply, including for commercial activity or personal injury occurring in the United States.

It has been used in high-profile cases involving foreign states, including litigation tied to terrorism and international disputes.

More on FSIA here: https://brokenice.substack.com/p/explainer-how-foreign-immunity-shields

At the center of the case was a fundamental disagreement over what the French Federation actually is—and how it should be treated under the law.

The Federation argued it is not a private sports body, but an extension of the French state. In court filings, it pointed to its government mandate, public funding, regulatory authority, and close oversight by French officials. It argued that it carries out a “public mission,” exercises powers delegated by the government, and even holds exclusive authority over ice sports in France. On that basis, it claimed it should be treated as a foreign state entity—and therefore immune from being sued in U.S. courts.

Lawyers for Jane Doe argued that the French Federation operates like a private organization—running training programs, funding athletes, hiring coaches, and maintaining a presence in the United States. They argue those activities are commercial in nature, and that the alleged harm—sexual abuse and failures in supervision—occurred entirely in Florida, placing the case within clear exceptions to sovereign immunity. Additionally, they contended the Federation is not a foreign state at all, but an independent sports body that should be subject to the same legal accountability as any other organization.

In the end, the court ruled in the Federation’s favor.

The Case Against Morgan Ciprès

While the case against the French Federation has now been dismissed, the civil case against Morgan Ciprès remains ongoing.

A trial has now been scheduled for January 2027.

Ciprès left the United States and is believed to be living in France.

It remains unclear whether Ciprès will appear or participate in the trial.

Court records show Ciprès terminated his attorney and was ordered to retain new counsel. After failing to do so, the court issued multiple orders requiring compliance—orders that, to date, do not appear to have been met.

As a result, the case may proceed without his participation. If Ciprès does not appear at trial, a jury could hear the case without any defense presented on his behalf. Alternatively, the court could impose sanctions for failing to appear or comply with its orders.

Ciprès also faces outstanding criminal charges in Florida. In 2020, he was charged with a third-degree felony in connection with the alleged conduct. A warrant for his arrest remains active. The criminal allegations have not been tested in court.

When contacted by Broken Ice in October, Ciprès declined an interview and asked not to be contacted further. In a brief response, he said the case “dates back to 2017. It is now 2025, more than eight years later. I am now married and moving forward with my life.”

The Broader Implications

The decision does more than end a single lawsuit—it may reshape how accountability works in international sport.

It raises the possibility that cases involving international federations could be decided on jurisdiction—before any evidence is heard.

It will certainly have far-reaching implications for future efforts to bring cases against the French Federation in the United States.

The implications are especially significant in a system where elite skaters regularly cross borders to train in the United States—one of the sport’s major global hubs, including for French athletes.

How—and whether other federations will be able to follow suit remains to be seen.

In global sport, where athletes often cross borders but justice systems do not, they may now face a more fundamental question: where, if anywhere, can their cases be heard?

Thanks for reading Broken Ice and supporting independent journalism. If you found this story valuable, please share it with others and consider leaving a tip via Buy me Coffee.

Buy Me a Coffee

Share

As Broken Ice approaches its six-month anniversary, I want to make sure the reporting continues to serve you in the most meaningful way possible.

This short survey is a chance to better understand who is reading, what’s resonating, and where to go next.

It should take less than 5 minutes—and your feedback will directly shape future investigations, coverage, and how Broken Ice evolves.

As a thank you, everyone who completes the survey will be entered for a chance to win a one-month paid subscription.

Paid subscribers get access to exclusive investigations, video or audio content and a subscriber chat with Broken Ice founder and journalist Lori Ward.

The survey and contest will be open until Monday April 13 at 5pm ET.

Earn a bonus entry to the contest by following me on Instagram at https://www.instagram.com/lori_ward__

Start Survey

Thank you for being here and for supporting independent journalism.

Lori

Trigger warning - This story discusses sexual assault of minors

“I miss the happiness it used to bring me. I miss feeling like, no matter what, skating would be there for me.”

Starting at just 14, the young woman behind those words was sexually abused by her figure skating coach, Matthew Power — a betrayal that shattered not only her love for the sport, but her sense of safety within it. What had once been a place of joy became a source of trauma. And then, learning that another victim had come forward a year earlier — and that no action had been taken — only deepened that trauma and sense of betrayal.

The impact was profound. At one point, overwhelmed by what she endured, she attempted to take her own life.

Power was ultimately convicted of eight sexual offences — a case widely reported as a rare example of accountability in sport. But a Broken Ice investigation has found that nearly a year before his arrest in 2021, allegations of sexual abuse involving a minor had already been reported — and no action was taken.

Subscribe now

The investigation shows that police received a report from a Skate Canada representative. Skate Canada says it had no knowledge of it. Evidence reviewed by Broken Ice indicates the report was made through Skate-Safe — the organization’s own third-party reporting system.

No one has explained why no investigation or suspension followed.

Now, the young survivor and her mother are speaking out for the first time, asking how a system designed to protect children failed when it mattered most.

Because this isn’t just a story about what one coach did.

It’s about what the system didn’t do when it had the chance to stop him.

The Case Against Matthew Power

Matthew Power was the head coach at the CBS Skating Club in Conception Bay South, Newfoundland, a province on Canada’s east coast.

In 2024, he was found guilty of multiple sexual offences involving two teenage athletes he coached. The court heard he used his position of trust to groom both victims — then between 13 and 16 years old. The two victims’ identities are protected by a publication ban and are known in court records only as E.M. and S.F.

Power was in his mid-20s at the time.

E.M., who began being coached by Power at age 11, testified that he began asking for nude photos and sexual videos over Snapchat when she was 14. The messaging escalated to multiple instances of sexual contact, including at the arena where she trained and in his car when he would drive her home from practice.

S.F. also testified that Power sent her explicit photos of himself over Snapchat and requested nude images in return. She took screenshots of the images — something she later explained she did because she knew what he was doing was wrong and believed she would need proof.

In January 2021, Skate Newfoundland Chairperson, Bev Power (no known relation to Matthew Power) became aware of the images sent to S.F. after she had shared them with a friend and they began to circulate through the skating club. She informed S.F.’s mother — identified in court documents as J.F. — about those images on January 3, 2021. J.F. immediately contacted police, prompting an investigation.

Power was suspended by Skate Canada that same day, and an internal investigation was launched.

He was arrested on July 7, 2021, charged with ten counts of sexual offences, and later found guilty of eight and sentenced to 6 years in prison. He is now permanently banned by Skate Canada.

But both court documents and police evidence show that E.M. had actually brought forward her allegations in February of 2020, nearly a year earlier.

The timeline matters — because what happened to S.F. may have been preventable.

The First Report

Broken Ice reviewed court records and a 2020 police report that show the allegation was reported — and then stalled.

Court records show that around January 2020, E.M., then 17, confided in her mother, A.M., about inappropriate sexual conduct by Power. Her mother, according to court records, contacted the president of the CBS Skating Club where they trained for guidance.

A.M.’s testimony indicates the club president reached out to Skate Canada and was advised that police would need to be contacted because E.M. was a minor.

According to the police report obtained by Broken Ice, a call was made to the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary (RNC) on February 14, 2020 by a Skate Canada representative based in Ontario. The full name was redacted from the report.

Broken Ice contacted the club president at the time, who agreed to speak on condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation. She confirmed she received the call from a parent in 2020 and reported the concern to Skate-Safe — Skate Canada’s third-party reporting mechanism designed to receive complaints of misconduct from all Skate Canada members. She said she was told the police were contacted.

In a follow-up exchange, she identified the person she spoke with as Skate-Safe case manager Cathy Velazquez.

At the time, E.M. chose not to participate in the police investigation — something later confirmed during the trial.

Police documentation states that without a cooperating complainant, they were unable to proceed. This is not uncommon, particularly in cases involving young victims of sexual abuse, where fear, trauma, and the prospect of a public process can make moving forward difficult.

Police say their ability to proceed was limited. In a statement, the RNC said that “without victim participation there was no other direct evidence upon which the RNC could act.”

But that limitation applied to law enforcement pursuing criminal charges — not to the organizations responsible for protecting children.

No Action and No Responsibility

Following the 2020 report, no further action was taken within the sport system.

No suspension. No internal investigation. No warning to the club or parents.

Despite the severity of the allegations, there is no evidence that Skate Canada, Skate-Safe, Skate Newfoundland, or the CBS Skating Club took steps to assess potential risk or implement safeguards.

The CBS Skating Club president told Broken Ice she was instructed that she “could not say anything” about the allegations. She confirmed there was no investigation or disciplinary action at the club level, noting that Power was in the process of leaving the club at the time.

On February 18, 2020, just days after the report was made to police, Power sent an email to his skaters saying he would be leaving the CBS Skating Club to coach elsewhere.

Skate Canada for its part has repeatedly told Broken Ice it had no knowledge of the allegations in 2020.

In response to questions from Broken Ice seeking confirmation of who made the police report and why no further action was taken, the national organization said:

“Skate Canada had no knowledge of Mr. Power’s misconduct prior to the complaint in January 2021… We have no knowledge of who this individual is, and we are deeply disappointed that both this individual and the police did not notify Skate Canada’s Safe Sport Officer or our official reporting channels upon learning of the allegations.”

Broken Ice reached out to Cathy Velazquez, the Skate-Safe case manager identified to Broken Ice as the individual who made the report to police, however she has refused to confirm her role or explain why no investigation or suspension followed.

In an initial phone call, she declined to discuss any details, citing confidentiality, despite the information in question already being in the public record.

In a follow-up written exchange, she did not address questions about whether she made the police call or why no investigation was initiated in 2020, instead noted:

“We take all misconduct reports received seriously, and proceed in accordance with the Policy and it’s procedure.”

Policy — and The Gap in Practice

What makes the lack of action in 2020 more difficult to explain is that Skate Canada’s own policies appear to allow for it.

According to the police report, the Skate Canada representative who made the call in February 2020 stated that the organization’s policy was to suspend coaches in these situations pending a criminal complaint, but that because the complainant was not proceeding, no disciplinary action would be taken.

But Skate Canada’s written policies tell a more complex story.

A copy of the organization’s 2020 policy, reviewed by Broken Ice, shows that a suspension could be imposed at the discretion of leadership — even before the outcome of a criminal investigation.

The current policy goes further.

It explicitly states that Skate Canada may take action regardless of whether criminal charges have been laid, noting that the organization “reserves the right, at its sole discretion, upon the recommendation of the Case Manager, to take appropriate action.”

In practice, that is exactly what happened in 2021.

When the second victim came forward, Power was immediately suspended — before charges were laid and before the criminal process had begun.

But in 2020, when the first report was made, no such action was taken.

“They Knew. And They Sat On It”

For J.F., the mother of the second victim, the contradictions and lack of accountability are not abstract.

“There’s no responsibility for Skate Canada for anything that happens, ever,” she angrily told Broken Ice. “Like nobody’s responsible. Not from club level, not from local level…Nobody’s responsible for anything.”

“They knew. And they sat on it.” she continued. “Skate Canada should have launched an investigation and put sanctions on him in 2020. It could have been a whole year that my kid didn’t have to go through this sh-t!”

Professor Nicholas Bala agrees. He is a Distinguished Professor in the Faculty of Law at Queen’s University, and an internationally recognized expert on Family and Children’s Law.

In an interview with Broken Ice he repeatedly stressed his opinion that this case was not dealt with appropriately.

“I don’t know what the Skate Canada policy is, but if it just says call the police and (if) the police don’t charge, that’s the end of it, then their policy needs to be revised,” he said.

Bala emphasized that the threshold for protecting children is not the same as the threshold required in a criminal court. But even without a police investigation moving forward, there were still steps that could have been taken.

“They have a duty not to continue to employ someone who poses a threat… They don’t need proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”

The Cost of Inaction

The consequences of what happened extend far beyond the criminal conviction.

In victim impact statements presented at trial, the judge heard how both victims were left traumatized.

For J.F. the trauma does not stop with her daughter.

“I have lived through a parent’s worst nightmare,” she told Broken Ice. “I had to watch my child not want to live anymore.”

“The world as I knew it ceased to exist on January 3, 2021,” she said. “There is my life before, and my life after.”

Despite all they have gone through, J.F. says no one from Skate Canada, Skate-Safe, Skate Newfoundland, or the CBS Skating Club has ever reached out to check on her or her daughter — or to offer support.

Instead, she says, the tight-knit skating community she once trusted turned its back on them.

That feeling was reinforced when 32 character letters were submitted to the court in support of Power after his conviction. Broken Ice reviewed those letters — many written by members of the skating community, including two coaches.

For J.F., reading those letters was its own kind of shock. It was a realization that made the support even harder to process.

“It took me a while to go over those letters…But what stood out was how many people were still supporting him — like none of this mattered.”

Now, J.F. is calling for a complete overhaul of Skate Canada’s policies — not just on paper, but in how they are applied. She hopes that by speaking out, the failures in her daughter’s case will lead to change — and that no other family will have to endure what hers has.

For S.F., the young woman quoted at the beginning of this story, the damage is enduring.

“This experience has completely tarnished the sport for me and I no longer want it to take up any part of my life,” she told Broken Ice. “I think for the rest of my life I will be wary of any authority, especially those who appear to be kind or well respected in their field. And he is to blame for this.”

But she is also choosing to speak — in the hope that others will, too.

“It will not be easy, or anything you’re expecting it to be, but it is worth it to find strength you didn’t know you had before, and feel pride in knowing that you did the right thing.”

Share

The 2026 Winter Olympics closed with no publicly announced positive doping cases and now sport’s anti-doping system is eager to signal progress.

Four years ago in Beijing, the 2022 Games were overshadowed by one of the most disturbing doping scandals in Olympic history: 15-year-old Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva’s positive test for a banned heart medication came to light during the games, igniting a global debate not just about cheating — but about how the system treats minors.

After a multi-stage consultation process launched in 2023, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) says its newly finalized 2027 Code will better protect minors. The revisions, set to take effect January 1, 2027, include sweeping changes affecting young athletes — from eliminating parental consent for testing to increasing scrutiny of coaches and other adults around them.

But experts warn that behind the headlines, the reality may be far more complicated.

A system built for adults by adults

WADA was created in 1999 to harmonize anti-doping rules worldwide. At the time, elite sport was largely adult-dominated. Today, teenagers — and sometimes even younger athletes — compete on the biggest stages. Yet the regulatory framework is still catching up to that reality.

In 2024, WADA released a report called Operation Refuge, which identified 1,518 positive doping tests involving minors, across 1,416 young athletes worldwide since 2012. The most detected substances were diuretics/masking agents, stimulants and anabolic agents. The youngest athlete ever sanctioned under the system was just 12 years old.

Adjunct professor of sports law at the University of Toronto, Marcus Mazzucco, says those numbers highlight a reality anti-doping rules were never originally designed for:

“These rules are written by adults for adults,” he told Broken Ice. “And even though concerns have been raised about child athletes over the years… It almost falls on deaf ears.”

Subscribe now

No Parental Consent Required for Testing

One of the most controversial changes involving minors in the 2027 Code removes the explicit requirement for parental consent or presence when minors undergo doping tests.

Under previous rules, parents or guardians were typically notified and allowed to supervise testing. That safeguard recognized the invasive nature of the process — which can involve blood draws or monitored urine collection.

Mazzucco says removing that requirement raises serious concerns.

“The doping control process itself is very invasive,” he explained. “Athletes who have to provide a bodily specimen…that’s kind of exposing yourself to the doping control official who’s an adult.”

Under many national laws, minors cannot legally consent to such procedures on their own. Previously, some anti-doping organizations even avoided testing children unless a parent could be present. Now, that safeguard disappears in the Code itself.

WADA’s rationale for the change is that anti-doping rules are “sport rules” accepted as a condition of participation — meaning consent is assumed when athletes compete.

Mazzucco calls the change “problematic” and notes that while some national anti-doping organizations raised “alarm bells” over the change because they do not want to get themselves in trouble under their own domestic laws, others expressed frustration with the need for parental consent during the consultation process because it makes testing more “administratively burdensome.”

“That kind of attitude just reflects that oftentimes there is a greater emphasis on detecting and deterring doping at all costs and not thinking about the rights violations that can be resulting from that,” Mazzucco stressed.

A Shift Toward Holding Adults Accountable

If the Valieva case in 2022 revealed anything, it was the imbalance of responsibility: a child faced years of scrutiny and punishment while the adults around her largely escaped consequences.

The 2027 Code attempts to address that by increasing obligations for Athlete Support Personnel (ASP) — a broad category that includes coaches, doctors, trainers, and even parents.

Under the new rules:

• Anti-doping bodies must automatically investigate support personnel when a Minor or Protected Person they support commits an anti-doping rule violation

• ASPs must undergo mandatory anti-doping education and provide accurate information to athletes they support

• Minimum bans for complicit adults are increased from two years to four years

These changes acknowledge a reality experts say has long been overlooked.

“Children are not doping without adult complicity,” Mazzucco said. “Whether that’s a coach, a parent, a team doctor — someone is involved.”

Previously, only international federations and national anti-doping agencies were required to investigate support personnel. The new Code expands that obligation to include organizations like the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and major event organizers — theoretically closing accountability gaps.

But skepticism remains about whether investigations will be meaningful, especially when federations or governments may have incentives to protect successful programs.

Even in Valieva’s case, documented attempts to investigate adults “led nowhere,” Mazzucco noted, because systems often rely on the very organizations implicated in producing elite athletes.

“We’ll have to wait and see if these changes to the WADA Code improve the focus or attention on athlete support personnel so they can be held legally accountable” Mazzucco said.

While the Valieva case cannot be relitigated, Mazzucco believes her support personnel could still be investigated.

Expanded “Special Protections” for 16- and 17-Year-Olds

WADA has also broadened protections beyond the category known as “Protected Persons.”

Historically, that status applied to athletes under 16 — or under 18 if they were not in a Registered Testing Pool (RTP) and had not competed internationally, as well as to individuals lacking legal capacity. Elite 16- and 17-year-old athletes were often treated like adults despite still being minors.

The 2027 World Anti-Doping Code strengthens protections for young athletes, extending certain safeguards beyond the traditional “Protected Person” category. The revised Code also clarifies that mandatory public disclosure is not required for a Minor, Protected Person, or Recreational Athlete, and any optional disclosure must take the individual’s best interests into account.

On paper, this appears to recognize that teenagers competing at the highest level remain vulnerable. But Mazzucco cautions that the distinction between “protected” and “elite minor” athletes remains arbitrary.

WADA’s logic assumes internationally competing teens have received anti-doping education and therefore should be held to adult standards.

“That’s equating athletic experience with cognitive maturity,” he said, stressing that education does not guarantee a young athlete has the autonomy or understanding to resist pressure from powerful adults — a dynamic widely cited in the Russian system exposed by the Valieva scandal.

No Special Rules for Provisional Suspensions

Perhaps the most striking gap is what did not change.

Despite the controversy surrounding Valieva being provisionally suspended during the Olympics — then allowed to compete — the new Code introduces no special rules for provisional suspensions for minors.

In Beijing, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) allowed Valieva to compete after lifting her provisional suspension, concluding that applying the rule to a Protected Person could be disproportionate under the anti-doping Code.

Mazzucco expected WADA to clarify this issue. Instead, the rules remain largely the same.

That means young athletes could still face immediate bans before their cases are fully heard — potentially losing major competitions even if later cleared, which Mazzucco does not believe is the fair way to handle cases involving minors.

The Unanswered Question

Legal observers have described the 2027 Code as more evolutionary than revolutionary, balancing deterrence with athlete welfare.

But the fundamental tension remains: elite sport demands strict anti-doping enforcement, while child protection requires flexibility and care.

Mazzucco believes one promising development is increased incentives for young athletes to provide information about adult involvement — potentially exposing systemic abuse.

Such whistleblowing could trigger investigations into coaches or medical staff and reduce sanctions for the athlete, reframing them as victims rather than perpetrators.

Still, he cautions that real change may depend less on policy and more on whether organizations are willing to enforce it.

“Unless they’re forced by courts to change their practices, they may not,” he said.

The real test of the new Code lies ahead.

The 2026 Winter Olympics in Milano-Cortina saw the highest highs and lowest lows of winter sports. What it also saw, as it always does, were questionable and controversial judging decisions in aesthetic sports.

By the end of the Games, controversy had spread across multiple disciplines, all linked by one common factor — outcomes determined not by stopwatches or sensors, but by human judgment.

A freestyle skier who landed the most difficult run of the night settled for silver. Ice dancers watched a single judge’s marks tilt the podium in favor of her own country’s team, and a snowboarding favorite may have lost the gold by virtue of the order in which they performed their best run.

The immediate reaction to controversial results is often a barrage of accusations directed at judges, ranging from incompetence to corruption. While there is a long history of intentional misconduct and political influence in judging — particularly in figure skating — the most common conclusion is that the judges were biased. But how exactly does bias work, and how should we understand its influence on scoring? The answers lie deep within human cognition, reflecting the complex evolution of the brain itself.

Broken Ice spoke with a sports psychologist to explore the physiological mechanisms behind bias and whether it can ever truly be eliminated.

Subscribe now

Bias Is Not Just Prejudice — It’s How the Brain Survives

Bias in judging is often assumed to be intentional favoritism. But in psychology, bias has a much broader meaning: a systematic error in decision-making.

Professor Inga Wolframm, a professor at Van Hall Larenstein University in the Netherlands and a sports psychologist with almost two decades of research on decision processes in aesthetic sports, explains that bias originates in a fundamental limitation of human cognition.

Humans are bombarded with enormous amounts of information every second, yet can process only a tiny fraction of it. The brain consumes about 20 percent of the body’s energy, but its capacity is capped. It cannot simply “work harder” to evaluate more data.

People receive roughly 11 million bits of sensory input per second — but can consciously process only about 50.

“We have to make a choice,” she explains. “We cannot possibly take into account all the information that is being triggered.”

The solution is what psychologists call cognitive shortcuts — quick rules that allow decisions under time pressure.

These shortcuts are efficient. They are also imperfect.

“Cognitive shortcuts are how we assess things and they become ingrained, not because all judges want to be cruel, but just simply that’s the way we are,” Wolframm explains.

Judging figure skating is the definition of a highly complex situation: choreography, edges, timing, lifts, musical interpretation, transitions, posture, speed, unison, and dozens of technical criteria — all unfolding in under four minutes.

A judge must observe, interpret, compare, remember, and score continuously.

Bias, in this context, according to Wolframm, is not a moral failing. It is a cognitive necessity.

The Three-Step Brain Process Behind Every Score

So how does decision making work?

Wolframm describes judging decisions as unfolding in three rapid stages.

First is perception. The judge must physically see the action — and viewing angles matter, Wolframm explains. Judges sitting at opposite ends of the judges’ panel, or even on opposite sides of the stadium, literally see different performances — and therefore their perspective will differ.

Second is categorization. Movements must be matched to mental templates. A template is the brain’s reference image — a pre-existing mental framework for how a movement or routine is supposed to be executed that judges use to interpret complex performances quickly.

Errors here can cascade through the rest of the evaluation, Wolframm notes. Judges must be able to assess all the criteria that they have and then match them to existing performance templates.

Third is integration. The judge combines what they saw with prior knowledge and experience to form a score.

At every step, shortcuts creep in.

If time is short or information overwhelming, the brain grabs cues it already trusts: familiarity, reputation, previous impressions.

“What you do is you grab hold of the stuff that you know,” Wolframm says. “This is not a conscious decision… you have to make a decision now… so they latch on to what’s familiar.”

Reputation, Memory, and the Halo Effect

In order to cope with such an information overload, the human brain again devises a number of different short-cuts that allow for an approximation of the correct categorization.

This means competitions judged in the past — or performances a judge has seen in training — may influence how they categorize a movement.

Wolframm outlined a few of the most common biases seen in sports:

Reputation bias is often the most visible in sports. Well-known athletes receive the benefit of the doubt. If a top team or athlete performs a borderline element, judges may assume it was executed well because that is what they expect.

Halo bias is similar to reputation bias, but occurs when an overall impression colors individual components. A stunning performance can elevate scores even on imperfect elements.

Memory bias means earlier performances influence later judgments — and vice versa. A judge who has seen the performance previously in a competition or even practice will always remember that, and it can become a memory bias influencing their score.

Order bias is a strong factor in major competitions as well. The order will favor later competitors because judges better understand the field as it unfolds. Early athletes are scored conservatively; later ones are judged relative to what came before.

“Human beings are very much inclined to when they compare one performance to the next, to especially focus on the stuff that is better than what they’ve seen before, rather than what is worse,” Wolframm explains.

“If the second performance is much better in pirouettes than the first, then they will get marked up on the pirouettes, but not necessarily marked down on the other things. And that is because humans essentially, we’re quite nice. We tend to focus on the stuff that’s better.”

And as Wolframm points out, when you then combine any or all of these together, you are creating an even stronger bias in the score.

Country Bias and the Psychology of Belonging

Nationalistic bias is perhaps the most controversial bias in Olympic sport — and arguably the most deeply rooted.

According to Wolframm, humans are social animals wired for group identity. At the Olympics, that identity is even more heightened.

Opening ceremonies, team uniforms, flags, medal tables — everything reinforces country affiliation and pride.

“Our identity is shaped so much by our culture,” Wolframm says. “We need a sense of belonging… That’s our human nature.”

Nationality becomes the strongest visible marker of that belonging.

Even judges striving for neutrality cannot erase it entirely, Wolfram stresses. Familiar athletes feel safer to score. Unknown competitors require more cognitive effort to evaluate.

Importantly, this bias, Wolframm says, is often unintentional and incremental. Notwithstanding cases where outside pressures to judge a certain way, judges are not necessarily thinking about favoring their country, but rather they are making dozens of tiny decisions under pressure, and those decisions will lean toward familiarity.

“If you’ve seen the routine several times and you know it’s familiar, you will be inclined to (add) one extra point or two extra points to, you know, to sort of push that up. And if you, shall we say, got away with it the last time you scored that particular athlete, and then you do it again, it sort of keeps repeating itself.”

Could Artificial Intelligence Remove Bias?

Technology offers promise — but not a simple solution, Wolframm notes.

Biomechanical measurement can objectively evaluate rotations, angles, speed, and precision. Computer vision systems can detect body positions and movement patterns. But AI trained on human judgments inherits human bias.

“If you feed it performances labeled ‘good’ by people, you bake that bias into it,” Wolframm warns.

A truly objective system would need precise definitions of ideal movement independent of human preference — a challenge in sports where artistic impression is central.

And even perfect technical scoring would leave artistic components unresolved.

“Aesthetic sports are art,” Wolframm notes. “That’s what makes them enjoyable.”

Can Bias Ever Be Eliminated?

The uncomfortable answer, according to Wolframm, is no.

Bias, she says, is both human nature and an unconscious action and arises from fundamental limits of human perception and decision-making. Removing it entirely would require removing humans from the process.

Even then, design choices, data selection, and interpretation would introduce new biases.

Even a completely neutral, first-time judge would not be free of bias, she stresses. Personal preferences — music style, costume, movement quality — would still influence perception. The difference is that such biases would be more random “noise” rather than the consistent patterns seen when judges repeatedly evaluate the same athletes and nations.

Wolframm argues the more realistic approach is awareness and mitigation.

Training judges to recognize biases, diversifying panels, averaging scores, and separating technical from artistic components can reduce systematic errors.

But the human element will remain.

“Bias is not avoidable,” she says. “You can decrease it, but you can’t get rid of it completely.”

Share

The Hard Truth About Judging

The public often assumes controversial results must involve wrongdoing.

Sometimes they do.

But often they reflect something subtler: the cumulative effect of many tiny, human decisions made under extreme cognitive pressure.

Judges are not casual observers. They undergo years — often decades — of training, certification, and evaluation. At the elite level, they develop the ability to process complex visual information far more efficiently than almost anyone else, rapidly parsing movement, technique, timing, and execution in ways that would overwhelm the vast majority of the population.

Yet even that extraordinary expertise has limits. Judges are asked to produce precise numerical evaluations of complex, fleeting performances — mostly in real time, while aware the world is watching.

They cannot process everything. No one can. So the brain fills the gaps.

It leans on experience. Expectation. Familiarity. Identity. Evolutionarily shaped instincts — developed long before sport existed — inevitably seep into modern decision-making, even among the most highly trained and principled officials.

Bias, in other words, is not an aberration of judging.

It is built into the system — because it is built into us.

You can read more about the previously suspended judges that were back at the 2026 Olympics and more of the biggest figure skating judging scandals here 👇

Figure skating has repeatedly confronted allegations of biased judging — and, in some cases, disciplinary action against officials themselves. While not every controversy results in sanctions, several judges have been suspended after investigations found evidence of favoritism, collusion, or improper conduct.

Under International Skating Union (ISU) rules, suspensions are typically time-limited rather than permanent. Once a disciplinary period ends, an official may apply to return to the judging pool, subject to eligibility requirements, re-certification, and nomination by their national federation.

In practice, this means that judges sanctioned for misconduct can — and sometimes do — officiate at ISU events again after serving their penalty.

Here is a look at some of the most well-known cases of figure skating judges being reprimanded including judges that were at the 2026 Milano-Cortina Olympics:

1999 & 2016 Russian Double Offender

At the 1999 World Figure Skating Championships in Helsinki, a Canadian television crew caught Russian judge Sviatoslav Babenko tapping his foot to signal his preferred placements in the pairs final to Ukrainian judge Alfred Korytek. The “toe-tapping” scandal, as it was coined, resulted in a three-year suspension that was later reduced to 18-months for Babenko. Koryteck was handed a two-year ban, later reduced to one year on appeal.

Babenko returned to judging and in 2016 was caught speaking loudly in Russian to another judge during an international event in Slovakia. Russian pair teams swept the podium at that event. Babenko was suspended for six-months. The other judge he had been talking to from Lithuania, Laimute Krauziene was reprimanded but not suspended.

Subscribe now

1998 — Secret Recording Exposes Pre-Planned Placements

At the 1998 Winter Olympics in Nagano, Canadian ice dance judge Jean Senft secretly recorded a phone conversation with Ukrainian judge Yuri Balkov that appeared to show an attempt to predetermine results before the competition began. According to reports, Balkov proposed exchanging favorable scores between their respective national teams — a form of vote-trading long rumored in the sport. Senft said she had previously alerted officials but recorded the call after her concerns were ignored.

When the recording became public, the ISU sanctioned both judges. Balkov received a one-year suspension, while Senft — despite acting as a whistleblower — was suspended for six months for participating in the conversation.

Balkov returned to judging and served on panels at the 2002 Olympics and the women’s final at the 2014 Games, where Russia’s Adelina Sotnikova controversially won gold over reigning Olympic champion Yuna Kim of South Korea.

2002 — Salt Lake City Olympic Scandal

The pairs event at the Salt Lake City Games became one of the most infamous judging scandals in Olympic history. Following the pairs event, evidence emerged that judges colluded to favor the Russian team over Canada’s Jamie Salé and David Pelletier, who finished second.

French judge Marie-Reine Le Gougne admitted she had been pressured by her federation to vote for the Russian pair in exchange for favorable treatment for the French ice dance team later in the Games. Le Gougne and French Federation president Didier Gailhaguet were both suspended for three years and barred from judging at the 2006 Olympics.

Olympic officials awarded the Canadians a second gold medal and overhauled the judging system, replacing the 6.0 format with today’s Code of Points; a system that was meant to reduce subjectivity in the judging.

2018 — Olympic Judges Sanctioned for Favoritism

Two Chinese judges were investigated and suspended by the ISU for preferential scoring toward Chinese competitors at the 2018 Olympics. Chen Weiguang was suspended for two years and Huang Feng was banned for a year.

Feng was later appointed as a technical controller for the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics pairs event and was on the panel for the Ice Dance final at the 2026 Olympics.

2021 — National Bias at World Championships

Following warnings from the ISU in 2020, Georgian judge Salome Chigogidze received a one-year suspension for scores deemed excessively favorable to Georgian skater Morisi Kvitelashvili at the 2021 World Championships. Officials concluded that the marks — particularly program components — demonstrated national bias.

Chigogidze was on the judging panel for the 2026 Winter Olympics.

For more on the psychology of bias and how it works in the judging of aesthetic sports check out: The Human Factor: Inside Bias in Olympic Judging

Share

This weekend marks the four-year anniversary of one of the most shocking figure-skating scandals the Olympics has ever seen. When 15-year-old Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva tested positive for a banned substance, the story quickly became global.

There were immediate cries for an investigation and accountability for the adults surrounding Valieva, including her coaches and team doctors.

Today, the sport’s governing body says those investigations have been completed, yielding no consequences to anyone beyond Valieva.

The subsequent ban on Russian athletes due to the Russia-Ukraine war and a four-year ban on Valieva herself have left one of the most troubling Olympic scandals in modern figure skating quietly unresolved — a case with no adult accountability at all.

Inside the Scandal

Valieva was supposed to be the star of the Beijing Games with what appeared to be an incredible talent.

She led Russia to the team gold medal and was the favourite for gold in the women’s individual event. Following the completion of the team event, the medal ceremony was abruptly postponed, and news soon broke that Valieva had tested positive for a banned substance in December 2021 — the results of which were not reported until that week in February 2022.

Valieva was permitted to compete in the individual event, pending the outcome of an investigation into the doping, but the pressure and media circus around her caused an error-filled performance and left her in fourth place.

Immediately after Valieva’s long program, cameras caught her coach, Eteri Tutberidze, looking upset and asking her, “Why did you stop fighting? Explain it to me, why?”

Veteran Olympic journalist and founder of Inside the Games, Duncan Mackay, has covered numerous Olympic scandals in his career. He says this case stands out as one of the most shocking he has witnessed.

“The most obvious thing really is the age of Valieva… she was so incredibly young. I mean that was the real shock,” he told Broken Ice.

Mackay, who along with colleague Michael Pavitt were the first to report that the positive test had been Valieva, says the wider context — the coaching environment, the secrecy and the behaviour surrounding the athlete — was itself shocking and should have triggered far deeper scrutiny.

“You know, it was just an incredibly bizarre situation and a lot of finger pointing and a lot of things that have just, I mean, they fell through the cracks, but I don’t know that it was unintentional.”

Share

Loud statements

During the Games, then-International Olympic Committee (IOC) president Thomas Bach publicly described the reaction of Valieva’s entourage, as “chilling” and said he was disturbed by what he witnessed.

“This was no way to treat a 15-year-old under such mental stress,” said Bach at the time. “To see her struggling, trying to compose herself, you could see the immense mental stress she was under.”

Bach even called for an investigation into Tutberidze and the rest of Valieva’s support team.

“There is a 15-year-old girl with a drug in her body that shouldn’t be there,” he said. “The ones that administered it to her, these are the people that are guilty.”

Mackay says he was quite surprised to see the IOC president at the time be so outspoken — but not at all surprised that they’ve subsequently done nothing about it.

As Mackay puts it:

“The IOC are very good at making big statements at the time of the Games… but once the spotlight’s off them, they very quickly push the issue back onto the federation.”

Repeated requests to the IOC about the Valieva case and any investigation were not answered.

An interview request with former president Thomas Bach was also declined.

No Sanctions

Broken Ice also reached out to the International Skating Union (ISU), the governing body for both Figure Skating and Speed Skating, to ask if they had initiated, requested, or participated in any inquiry — formal or informal — into the role of Valieva’s entourage, including coaches, team officials, medical staff, or athlete support personnel.

The ISU told Broken Ice, “Investigations into the entourage of Kamila Valieva that were possible within the scope of the ISU’s applicable regulations at the time of Beijing 2022 were carried out and did not result in sanctions.” No further details of the investigation were provided.

They did add that, “The ISU is firmly committed to safeguarding skaters and all members of the skating community. We have robust mechanisms in place to ensure that any concerns are addressed with the utmost seriousness, fairness, and respect for due process.”

Additionally, despite the doping in this case occurring at an event outside of the Olympic games, the ISU noted that “the Olympic Winter Games are governed by the IOC. While many of our own measures apply there, others are the responsibility of the IOC, who are also taking various initiatives to safeguard athletes.”

Former world pairs champion and Olympic medalist Meagan Duhamel says she finds the ISU response about an investigation “mind boggling,” but not at all surprising.

“Do I expect them to go thorough and find the information that we already know? No… They don’t want this brought into the light.”

Duhamel points to years of public allegations about abusive training environments and unhealthy eating behaviours connected to the same coaching system.

“Skaters and coaches have publicly admitted it. How does that make sense?”

When asked directly whether she believes the ISU actually conducted a meaningful investigation, her answer was blunt.

“No. Do I believe them to have done that? No. I’d like for them to prove that somehow.”

Mackay echoed those same sentiments about the lack of accountability for Tutberidze.

“I’m not surprised. Because it’s a very uncomfortable situation and it was more than just about Valieva, wasn’t it? Because she’s such a successful coach who’s worked with so many top skaters over a long period of time. If they’d have ruled that Valieva had been a victim, they would have been opening the floodgates to everyone else.”

Lost in the Shadows

Soon after the Beijing Games ended, Russia was banned from international sport following its invasion of Ukraine. That ban fundamentally changed the landscape.

According to Mackay, it also made it easier for the governance questions raised by the Valieva case to quietly disappear from the IOC radar.

“It just put everything in the shadows,” he said.

Duhamel agrees that the geopolitical ban effectively removed pressure on the sport’s leadership to confront what happened in Beijing.

“It stopped them from needing to take any sort of accountability… I do think that they’ve kind of slipped it under the rug in terms of not needing to be accountable just because they haven’t been competing.”

No Answers

Valieva’s ban expired in December 2025. While she is not able to compete at the 2026 Olympics, she has since returned to domestic competition in Russia.

Her former coach, Eteri Tutberidze, is at the Milano Games with another young Russian woman, Adeliia Petrosian, and a male skater representing Georgia, Nika Egadze.

Ahead of the start of the 2026 Olympics, the head of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) told the media he feels “uncomfortable” seeing Valieva’s former coach present at the Milano-Cortina 2026 Games, while also saying that no evidence was found linking the coach directly to the doping offence from 2022.

But as both Mackay and Duhamel point out, doping was never the only concern raised by what unfolded in Beijing.

For Duhamel, the message all of this sends to athletes is devastatingly clear.

“You’d be hard-pressed to find an athlete that truly believes their sport is athlete-centred… the powers that be don’t have their best interests at heart.”

Duhamel continued, “Nothing has changed. Nothing’s been done to help this situation. And hopefully, you know, when the time comes when Russia is allowed to fully compete, this is dealt with finally properly.”

Four years later, neither the IOC nor the ISU can point to a single sanction imposed on any adult responsible for Valieva’s training, medical care, or competitive environment.

And the most uncomfortable truth remains unchanged:

In the most high-profile doping case of the last Olympic cycle, the only person who paid a price was a 15-year-old girl.

Subscribe now

Please be sure to subscribe to Broken Ice. Paid members get exclusive content for just $3 a month with a yearly subscription. You can also support my work by buying me a coffee. Every bit helps support independent journalism and makes it possible for me to keep reporting on accountability, athlete safety, and governance in sport.

Buy Me a Coffee