Genetic Testing: The Legal Storm Facing Women’s Sport

JUSTICE: From the SRY gene to courtrooms in Europe, the debate over genetic testing in women’s sport is redefining fairness, inclusion and the future of human rights in athletics…

By Seema Patel and Ian Varley

Testing the biological sex of an athlete is becoming more common in sport, with governing bodies defending the practice as safeguarding fairness for women.

But, as the introduction of mandatory genetic testing raises questions about human rights, it could pave the way for more legal challenges. The study is titled “Genetics, gender and justice: the legal implications of genetic testing for gender eligibility in sport published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine.

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 signaling, 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 criticized 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 organizations 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. – Science X

Timeline: Key Legal Battles Over Gender Eligibility in Sport

1960s – Sex Verification Introduced

International sport begins mandatory sex testing for women, initially through physical examinations and later chromosome testing. The practice is widely criticised as invasive and unscientific.

1990s – Chromosome Testing Abandoned

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) phases out blanket chromosome screening after scientific and ethical objections. Policies shift toward case-by-case review.

2009 – Caster Semenya Case Emerges

Caster Semenya becomes the focus of sex verification scrutiny after winning the 800m at the World Championships. Her case ignites a global debate on privacy, race and gender in sport.

2015 – CAS Suspends Hyperandrogenism Rules

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) temporarily suspends World Athletics’ testosterone regulations in the case of Indian sprinter Dutee Chand, citing insufficient scientific evidence linking testosterone levels to performance advantage.

2018 – New Testosterone Regulations Introduced

World Athletics introduces revised rules requiring certain athletes with differences of sex development (DSD) to lower testosterone levels to compete in women’s middle-distance events.

2019 – Semenya Loses CAS Appeal

CAS upholds World Athletics’ regulations, ruling that the testosterone limits are discriminatory but “necessary” to preserve fairness in women’s sport.

2020–2023 – European Court Challenge

Semenya challenges the ruling at the Swiss Federal Supreme Court and later the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

In 2023, the ECHR finds that aspects of her case were not properly reviewed in Switzerland, raising concerns about fair trial protections.

2024–2025 – Return of Genetic Testing

Governing bodies including World Athletics and World Boxing announce the reintroduction of genetic testing for eligibility in women’s events, including screening for the SRY gene.

2026 – Legal Scrutiny Intensifies

New academic research warns that mandatory genetic testing may violate privacy, consent and anti-discrimination protections under UK, European and international human rights law — setting the stage for fresh legal challenges.