Genetic testing in sport: fairness, human rights and the law

What is genetic testing?

Genetic testing in sport to determine sex is the use of DNA analysis to identify an athlete’s biological sex, usually by looking for the presence of the SRY gene found on the Y chromosome.

Sport governing bodies such as World Athletics and World Boxing have recently brought back these tests for anyone competing in women’s events.

Although presented as a scientific way to “verify” sex, biological sex cannot be determined by genetics alone. Sex involves a range of biological processes such as hormonal signalling, physiology and gonadal development, which cannot be reduced to a single gene.

This means that genetic tests offer an incomplete and potentially misleading picture, yet athletes may still be barred from competition if their results do not fit the criteria set by sporting bodies.

Why has genetic testing been introduced in sport?

Sport organisations say genetic testing has been reintroduced to protect fairness and maintain the integrity of women’s sport. Policymakers argue that “male‑bodied” athletes may have physical advantages, and they want a clear method for deciding who qualifies for women’s events.

However, the link between having a Y chromosome and superior athletic performance is not straightforward, and past testing methods have been criticised as invasive, unreliable and discriminatory.

Despite this, pressure from political debates, high‑profile cases and disputes at international events has led some governing bodies to return to genetic testing as a quick and decisive way to regulate eligibility.

What does NTU research show about the legalities and human rights implications of genetic testing in sport?

Our research into the legal implications of genetic testing for gender eligibility in sport shows how mandatory genetic testing raises serious legal questions around discrimination, privacy, consent and bodily autonomy.

Human rights laws in the UK, Europe and internationally place strong protections on genetic data and prohibit discrimination based on genetic characteristics.

Genetic testing may violate these protections by forcing athletes to reveal sensitive information and potentially undergo further medical checks they have not truly consented to. There is also the risk of data breaches, misuse of genetic information and conflicts with countries whose laws ban non‑medical genetic testing.

Previous legal cases, including those involving athlete Caster Semenya, show that courts are increasingly willing to challenge sport organisations when eligibility rules breach human rights.

Sport bodies may not be able to rely on genetic testing without facing significant legal challenges.

Why is this important?

This issue goes far beyond sport. It shapes how society treats gender‑diverse, DSD (differences of sex development) and trans people, and raises major questions about fairness, inclusion and privacy. The return of genetic testing risks reinforcing narrow, outdated ideas of sex and excluding athletes who do not fit neatly into binary categories.

It also sets a precedent. If sport governing bodies can mandate genetic testing, it opens the door to wider uses of genetic data in ways that may undermine individual rights. Such policies can do more harm than good, creating stigma, triggering legal disputes and placing unnecessary burdens on athletes.

What could be done differently?

An alternative approach is to use a “fundamental rights assessment” - combining science, ethics, law and human rights - rather than relying on genetic tests alone. This would lead to more balanced, fair and humane policies for everyone involved in sport.

This explainer is based on the paper Genetics, gender and justice: the legal implications of genetic testing for gender eligibility in sport by Associate Professor Seema Patel, Nottingham Law School and Professor Ian Varley, School of Science and Technology, published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine.