On the Problems of Using Term «Fitness» in the Legislation of the Russian Federation

Abstract

The article centers on the study of new concepts in the legislation of the Russian Federation on physical training and sports. The authors analyze the concept of «fitness center», whichhas appeared in the legislation quite recently. There have arisen doubts about the rationale for its use among the variety of many similar terms that are actuallyemployed, which creates difficulties in determining their correlation. It has been noted that the term «fitness» has no conventional meaning and is not traditional for Russian reality. Another option is proposed to regulate the operation of physical training and sports organizations, the purpose of which is to provide citizens with services of physical training and physical development. In the approach proposed by the authors, the text of the law should contain a general term to unify names of such organizations. Under this approach, the term «fitness center» is unnecessary. The authors have not found any reasons for introducing the term «fitness» into the text of the Russian law, although they do not exclude their appearance in the future. Many practical problems have been noted that arise due to the lack of high-quality legal regulation of the activities of organizations that provide citizens with physical training and physical developmentservices. The authors come to the conclusion that the main problem is not the name of such organizations, but the contents of the regulation of their activities. The necessity of legislative clarification of such terms as «crossfit», «aqua fitness», «fitness aerobics», «body fitness», «fitbox» and some others is analyzed. The authors note that their indtoduction intothe text of a normative legal act is possible in order to set the rules for a particular sport or instructions for coaches, orin other similar documents. Simple placing of terms and their definitions in the text of the law is perceived as inappropriate.