Sexual assault on college campuses is a problem that
continually draws the attention of the nation and how to best deal with it. The
conversation primarily focuses on the responsibility that an institution has
when the crime has already been committed. This has become even more heated in
the wake of recent events like Penn State and UNC-Chapel Hill. The hope and
intent of the “Dear Colleague” letter from the Office of Civil Rights was that
under Title IX institutions would be held responsible to protect victims of
sexual assault, Title IX call for non-discrimination on the basis of sex. Recent
events and this letter have led to many more questions. The line between legal
and social responsibility begin to blend and makes a painful situation
confusing as well.
The “Dear
Colleague” letter, published on April 4, 2011, requires institutions to “have
transparent, prompt procedures to investigate and resolve complaints of sexual
misconduct, protecting the rights of alleged victims” (Lipka, 2011). This
letter was to try to insure that victims were not being left unprotected
because of the process of cases. The letter has called into question if
institutions are being asked to make legal decisions. As soon as it was
released many suggestions were made for revision. “Congress approved a bill
renewing the Violence Against Women Act (S 47) that incorporates the first
major campus-security legislation in years, the Campus Sexual Violence
Elimination Act, which is known as the Campus SaVE Act (Schnoebelen, 2013). The
Campus SaVE Act make the “Dear Colleague” letter a requirement for
institutions.
One response in particular that
campuses have had is to call in the experts. Amherst College and UNC have both
called on Gina Smith. She is a lawyer with background serving as prosecutor for
sex crimes; she now serves as a consultant to higher education institutions in
sexual misconduct cases (Sander, 2013). Her role is to help the institutions
respond to incidents on their campuses and help them form policies to deal with
future cases. Ms. Smith has helped lead discussions on campuses after incidents
and her knowledge of the issue allows these institutions to have someone assist
them in navigating this sensitive issue. I believe this also shows that Title
IX coordinators alone have an extremely large task laid in their lap under the “Dear
Colleague” letter, perhaps something that is too large for a non-expert to undertake.
Some are under the opinion that
these actions will actually lead to discrimination of the accused. The concern
is that “a lower evidentiary standard implies that more students accused of
sexual misconduct will be found responsible” (Lipka, 2011). Christina Hoff
Sommers wrote an impassioned article that greatly defended that it would
greatly discriminate against males (2011). “Now, on campuses throughout the
country, we face the prospect of academic committees—armed with vague
definitions of sexual assault, low standards of proof, and official sanction
for the notion that sex under the influence is, ipso facto assault or
rape—deciding the fate of students accused of a serious crime” (Sommers, 2011).
She further argued that:
“The new regulations should be seen
for what they really are. They are not enlightened new procedures for
protecting students from crime. They are a declaration of martial law against
men, justified by an imaginary emergency, and a betrayal of the Title IX equity
law.” (Sommers, 2011)
Several people responded very angrily to her article.
However, she raises an important question. Are we asking our higher education
institutions to take on more legal responsibility?
Sources:
Lipka, S. (2011). Campuses Strive for Compliance and
Fairness in Policies on Sexual Assault. The
Chronicle of Higher Education.
Sander, L. (2013) In Campuses' Sexual-Assault Crises, an
Outside Voice Offers Guidance. The
Chronicle of Higher Education.
Schnoebelen, A. (2013). Push to Improve Campus Policies on
Sexual Violence Gains Momentum. The
Chronicle of Higher Education.
Sommers, C. (2011). In Making Campuses Safe for Women, a
Travesty of Justice for Men. The
Chronicle of Higher Education.
No comments:
Post a Comment