When an athlete asks for your help cutting weight, they are placing trust in your judgement. Duty of care is the practical obligation that comes with that trust: the requirement to act in the athlete's best interest, even when the athlete themselves may be pushing for a different outcome.

When to Refuse to Support a Cut

The Reale et al. (2017a) flow chart provides clear safety thresholds. A coach should refuse to support a cut when:

• The athlete's body mass is more than 10% above the target weight division
• The athlete's body mass is more than 5% above the target weight division and there are fewer than 4 hours between weigh-in and competition
• The athlete has a medical condition that could be worsened by dehydration or energy restriction
• The athlete has an active or recent history of disordered eating
• The athlete is a junior and the cut would require anything beyond the lowest-risk methods

These are not guidelines to be weighed against competitive ambition. They are lines that should not be crossed.

Having the Conversation

Refusing to support a cut is rarely comfortable. The athlete may be disappointed, frustrated, or convinced you are being overcautious. Some practical approaches:

• Use the flow chart as your framework. Show the athlete the decision node that applies to their situation. The refusal is not personal; it is the outcome of a structured, evidence-based process.
• Be direct. "Based on the numbers, I can't support a cut to this weight class for this competition. Here's why." Avoid vague reassurances or half-commitments.
• Offer an alternative. "You can compete at your natural weight in the next division up" or "We can plan a gradual approach for the next competition in 8 weeks."
• Acknowledge the athlete's goal. You are not dismissing their ambition. You are saying that this specific cut, at this specific time, is not safe.

Referral to Professionals

Coaches are not doctors, dietitians, or psychologists. Knowing when to refer is part of competent coaching.

• Sports dietitian: When gradual body composition change is warranted. When the athlete needs a personalised nutrition plan. When the cut requires advanced carbohydrate manipulation.
• Sports physician: When the athlete has a medical condition. When you observe signs of dehydration that concern you. When the athlete reports symptoms during a cut (dizziness, confusion, chest pain, dark urine, absent urination).
• Psychologist or counsellor: When you suspect disordered eating. When the athlete shows excessive anxiety around weight. When the athlete's relationship with food appears unhealthy.

Making a referral is not an admission of failure. It is the responsible action.

Documentation

If you agree to support a weight cut, document the plan. This protects you, protects the athlete, and creates accountability. At minimum, record:

• The athlete's starting weight, target weight, and percentage of body mass to be lost
• The methods to be used and the timeline
• Any risks discussed with the athlete
• The athlete's informed consent (verbal or written)
• Monitoring checkpoints and what to watch for

The Weight Cut Planning Worksheet (Module 2) serves this purpose. Using it consistently is good practice.

Communication with Parents and Guardians

For any athlete under 18, parents or guardians must be informed and give consent before any weight management strategy is applied. This is non-negotiable. The conversation should cover:

• What the cut involves (methods, timeline, magnitude)
• What the risks are, in plain language
• What alternatives exist (competing at natural weight, moving up a division)
• What monitoring will be in place

Do not rely on the junior athlete to relay this information. Speak to the parent or guardian directly.

Club Policies on Weight Management

Individual coaches making individual decisions is not a sustainable model. Clubs should establish clear policies that:

• Define which methods are acceptable and which are prohibited within the club
• Set minimum age requirements for any weight cutting activity
• Require documentation for all planned cuts
• Identify when professional referral is mandatory
• Name the responsible person for oversight (head coach, club welfare officer, or similar)

A written policy gives coaches a framework to fall back on when under pressure from athletes, parents, or competition culture.

The Line Between Managing and Enabling

There is a difference between managing a weight cut safely and enabling an athlete to engage in harmful behaviour. Consider these scenarios:

• An athlete asks you to help them cut 2% using a low-residue diet and mild fluid restriction, with 24 hours of recovery time. This is weight management.
• An athlete insists on cutting 8% in 5 days using sauna and severe food restriction, against your advice, and you agree because they are a senior athlete and "know their body." This is enabling.
• A parent asks you to help their 14-year-old "make weight" by skipping meals for two days before a tournament. This is enabling.

The distinction matters because enabling harms the athlete, and it places the coach in a position of liability. If something goes wrong during a cut you knew was unsafe but agreed to anyway, "the athlete wanted to do it" is not a defence.

Module 4 returns to these themes. The reflective essay asks you to articulate your own position on these questions. Start thinking about where you draw your lines now.