Apparently, hope is a performance enhancing drug that disqualifies athletes. Victoria Arlen (pictured above) is a US athlete who is the defending gold medal champion for the 100m freestyle at the 2012 Paralympic Games.
This week, Victoria was disqualified because the International Paralymic Committee has questions whether her disability is "permanent." Seven years ago, she woke up from a coma and could not move her legs. She is paralyzed from the waist down and is also wheelchair bound.
After she won four medals and set a world record last year, there was a review of her medical records. It was deemed that there was still "hope" that her disability is not permanent - and this drew the ban from this year's competition.
Doesn't every athlete (whether it be olympian or paralympian) have hope to recover from illness, injury, and disability? Plain and simple, she was unfairly penalized for being too good. Before he went nuts, Oscar Pistorius was questioned whether technology (meaning his bionic legs) was an unfair advantage during his paralympic dominance.
What kind of precedent does Victoria's disqualification send through the paralympic world? Don't disabled athletes have enough of a challenge? Will these athletes now be discouraged from participating at the highest levels when they have to compete against other athletes and the International Paralympic Committee? This ruling is definitely not in the spirit of The Olympic Games.