How did it all start?

I watched the documentary “Athlete A”, …

The 2020 documentary film about the abuse scandal in gymnastics involving the US team doctor Larry Nassar…

I watched it in the middle of the night, on the second or third day after its release. I had a small baby at the time who was about six months old and as soon as I saw the film, I sensed this was a milestone moment for gymnasts worldwide. I had been wanting to talk about abuse in my own gymnastics career for around fifteen years or more, but at the time I didn't really know how to use the word “abuse” or “survivor” in a sporting context. Similarly to many others, Athlete A gave me a vocabulary with which to articulate what had happened to me.

And then?

It was quickly becoming clear that the same issues I had experienced were not isolated incidents, but part of a much wider, systemic problem. With the help of a barrister I knew, I set up the first group legal action in the UK and within six weeks or so, we had around 40 people who all had civil claims against our National Governing Body, British Gymnastics.

How is G4CI organized?

For the first few years, we were a volunteer-led campaign group. I was helping to coordinate the efforts of multiple courageous athletes speaking out in the media via a WhatsApp group. The sustained public pressure we were able to generate helped lead to the Whyte Review.

… An investigation into abuse in the British Gymnastics federation conducted by the British lawyer Anne Whyte.

We are now a registered charity and a team of 14 people working on part-time contracts.

Why is such an organisation important?

We need sustained, coordinated efforts that bring together a power base of athletes, so that our narratives can't be minimized in the way that they traditionally have been. The reality is that athletes have been speaking out about abuse in gymnastics for 40 years and they were shut down again and again. Now it is crucial to maintain the pressure, because the work on real reforms has only just begun.

You mentioned the Whyte Review: across 400 pages, it documents abuse in gymnastics between 2008 and 2020. How important is this investigation?

Very important, because it was an independent investigation at the national level. It made it clear that things have to change. In my opinion, however, it did not go far enough: its primary purpose was essentially to hear the perspective of the gymnastics community and identify systemic themes of abuse, not to make any judgments on particular coaches or clubs.

Following the Whyte Review, there was the Reform 25 initiative – how satisfied are you with it?

Back in 2020, Gymnasts for Change International produced our own 78-point Call for Change document, which in 2025, we benchmarked against what British Gymnastics had done. On that basis, I would say that as of today, I'm 36% happy with what they've done. BG has implemented around a third of our points. There was another third they were in the process of implementing, and a final third they hadn't addressed. A gymnast in training is always expected to give 100 percent; I would like to see the same standard applied when it comes to protecting athletes.

How do you assess the impact so far overall?

It is undeniable that BG has done a great deal over the past three years to change the sport, for example in coach education. That is welcome, but much clearer definitions of abuse are needed. The “independent complaints process” that has been set up is unfair: it deals with allegations against specific coaches, who are allowed legal representation, while the gymnasts and witnesses are not. In addition, the process is incredibly slow and opaque. And there is a complete lack of empathy and understanding for those affected.

Have sanctions been imposed on coaches?

To our knowledge, allegations of emotional and physical abuse have been substantiated in more than 20 cases, including against some national team coaches. Warnings and requirements for further training have been issued. However, the results have not been published, which means that parents in this sport do not know whether allegations have been made against their children’s coach.

Alongside advocacy and support for those affected, strategic litigation forms the third pillar of G4CI’s program. Proceedings before German courts have so far proven difficult. What has been your experience?

The majority of the abuse carried out against women and girls in the sport doesn’t meet criminal thresholds: it is largely non-contact physical abuse (such as extreme weight management practices or enforced training through injury), coercive control and emotional manipulation. These forms of abuse leave severe psychological damage but are often not recognized. Civil class actions are immensely important here, because it is now the insurance companies that are putting pressure on our federation and holding it accountable for what has happened.

Another difficult issue in Germany is the dismissal of coaches. What is the situation in the United Kingdom?

In the UK it has proved extremely difficult to kick the coaches out. In hearings, abuse is often confirmed, but then legal standards of proof are applied that do not account for the forms of abuse in question. In the end, the coaches are allowed to continue working. That is a tremendous injustice. A large part of our work consists of challenging such decisions. The recognition of coercive control as a form of abuse is essential for child protection in sport.

How important would a list of banned coaches be, like the one that exists in the United States?

Absolutely essential, because transparency is essential. At present, we do not have such a list. All that we have in gymnastics at the moment (which came about only as a result of the campaigning efforts and the Whyte Review) is a list of coaches that have historically been banned. In the last two years, only a handful of additional coaches have been added to that list despite the many investigations that have concluded into coaches who are still practising today. Meanwhile, the athletics federation sets an example: on the UK Athletics website, you can view all sanctions imposed on coaches, the outcomes of hearings, and related details.

One aspect that is repeatedly called for is raising the minimum age for gymnasts. What is your view on this?

Absolutely, the age limit should go up. Under current World Gymnastics rules, women’s artistic gymnasts may compete as seniors in World Championships, the Olympic Games and other senior events in the year they turn 16. This early transition into senior competition artificially accelerates the development of elite-level skills at ages when the body is still maturing. What we need is recognition from the International Gymnastics Federation and the International Olympic Committee that there is a problem with the current age limits.

Do you believe that abuse is a fundamental problem of elite sport in general, or a specific problem in gymnastics?

I think there are issues with athletes’ rights in all sports, but how those problems manifest is closely tied to the culture of each sport. In gymnastics—artistic gymnastics, rhythmic gymnastics, or acrobatics—we have a problem affecting women and girls, because misogynistic attitudes are deeply embedded in the structures of these disciplines. And we have a particular issue: in the United Kingdom, 89 percent of participants in gymnastics are girls under the age of 12. So this is a child protection issue and an issue of violence against women and girls. It goes far beyond what one might imagine in other sports that are predominantly practiced by men or male youth.

What needs to change in the long term?

National governing bodies have to set the standard for what good coaching should look like, as British Gymnastics have begun to do in their coach education programmes. And they have a responsibility to educate everyone in the system—not only coaches, but also the gymnasts themselves. They need to tell their athletes: “Please reflect back to us if your personal coaches are not delivering on this. And if they're not, come to us and we will help to give you a voice, give you agency.” At that point, you know you've got a healthier system in which performance excellence and athlete agency coexist.

How optimistic are you?

I believe we could have ethical sport which includes human rights and athlete protections. There is no reason why we can't create cultures in which athletes are succeeding because they have found ways to optimise their performance in a healthy way. We don't have to brutalise athletes through endurance of avoidable suffering.