Exploring Existentially-Based Interventions For Career Transitions in Sport

From Introduction: Career transition issues have become of increasing interest in the field of sport psychology. Confronting the end of an athletic career is an inevitable reality that every athlete will confront in his or her lifetime (Baillie, 1993), regardless of level of competition (Kerr & Dacyshyn, 2000) or the amount of free choice related to the transition. Many athletes are able to cope with the effects of the transition process effectively, and see retirement as an opportunity to pursue new ventures and identity roles in life. However, retirement from sport can be an event that often results in various adjustment difficulties for an athlete involving emotional, social, financial, and vocational conflicts. Some athletes have reported experiencing effects such as depression, eating disorders, decreased self-esteem, increased suicidality, and substance abuse (Kerr and Dacyshyn, 2000). These types of distress can be exacerbated by the fact that many athletes fail to adequately anticipate and prepare for their impending transition (Baillie, 1993), and often embark on the retirement process without any formalized support (Stier, 2007).Typically, the role of a sport psychologist has been to assist in maximizing an athlete's competitive performance during the course of their career. However, as a sport psychologist's primary responsibility is to serve active competitors and athletic organizations, this tends to come at the expense of failing to provide follow-up care for the athlete as he or she retires from sport (Taylor, Ogilvie, and Lavallee, 2006). Since the 1970's, when the efforts of professionals in European sports organizations first received attention, there has been growing interest in academic circles about career transition

FOIA, Inc.

Government transparency is imagined as a public good necessary to a robust democracy. Consistent with that vision, Congress enacted the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to allow oversight and accountability of governmental activities. No actors are more central to the design than journalists, who were not only the prime intended users, but who were intimately involved in crafting the law itself. But this democracy-enhancing ideal is at odds with FOIA’s reality: at some agencies, commercial — not public — interests dominate the landscape of FOIA requesters. This Article provides the first in-depth academic study of the commercial use of FOIA, drawing on original datasets from six federal agencies. It uses these agencies as case studies to examine the way that businesses derive profit-making value from free or low-cost federal records. Remarkably, these datasets also reveal a cottage industry of companies whose entire business model is to request federal records under FOIA and resell them at a profit. Information resellers are not isolated occurrences, but rather are some of the most frequent FOIA requesters — often submitting hundreds or even thousands of requests a year — at a variety of federal agencies. Commercial users certainly have legitimate information needs, but, as this Article demonstrates, the volume and character of the current commercial use of FOIA undermines its efficacy as a transparency tool. Private businesses in essence receive a substantial subsidy without any corresponding public good, all while draining agency resources that might otherwise be used to respond to FOIA requests that serve its central oversight and accountability aims. Moreover, information resellers have become the de facto locus for federal records for whole industries, effectively privatizing an important public function. Counter-intuitively, limiting commercial requesting will not solve this problem. Instead, this Article proposes a targeted and aggressive policy of requiring government agencies to affirmatively disclose sets of records that are routinely the subject of FOIA requests — a surprisingly large number of the documents sought by commercial requesters. By meeting information needs in a more efficient manner that is available equally to all, affirmative disclosure will enable federal agencies to reclaim public records from the private market and free up resources to better serve FOIA requests that advance its democratic purpose.

FOIA, Inc.

Government transparency is imagined as a public good necessary to a robust democracy. Consistent with that vision, Congress enacted the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to allow oversight and accountability of governmental activities, imagining the prime intended users to be journalists. But this democracy-enhancing ideal is at odds with FOIA’s reality: at some agencies, commercial—not public—interests dominate the landscape of FOIA requesters. This Article provides the first in-depth academic study of the commercial use of FOIA, drawing on original datasets from six federal agencies. It documents how corporations, in pursuit of private profit, have overrun FOIA’s supremely inexpensive processes and, in so doing, potentially crowded out journalists and other government watchdogs from doing what the law was intended to facilitate: thirdparty oversight of governmental actors. It also reveals a cottage industry of companies whose entire business model is to request federal records under FOIA and resell them at a profit, which distorts the transparency system even further. Counterintuitively, limiting commercial requesting will not solve this problem. Instead, this Article proposes a targeted and aggressive policy of requiring government agencies to affirmatively disclose sets of records that are the subject of routine FOIA requests—a surprisingly large number of the documents sought by commercial requesters. By meeting information needs in a more efficient manner that is available equally to all, affirmative disclosure will enable federal agencies to reclaim public records from the private market and free up resources to better serve FOIA requests that advance its democratic purpose.