When a Student Confides a Rape, Should a Professor Have to Report It?

[Wella]

In California, K-12 teachers are mandatory reporters of all kinds of abuse, including sexual abuse. Many colleges are extended this responsibility (though not a legal obligation) to college professors.

When a Student Confides a Rape, Should a Professor Have to Report It?
http://chronicle.com/article/When-a-Student-Confides-a/149855/

While a faculty member’s primary roles may be teaching and research, it isn’t unusual for students to use professors as a sounding board for personal problems, even serious ones like rape. New rules on many campuses, however, now mean that if students confide in faculty members about a sexual assault, the professors are required to report the information to college officials.

That change in the way campuses are interpreting faculty responsibilities under the gender-equity law known as Title IX makes some professors uneasy. They say they are often on the front lines when it comes to students' venting about both their academic struggles and their private lives. In some cases, students even write about deeply personal issues as part of course assignments...

"Sexual assault on our campuses is a problem, and there is a lot that faculty can do to help—through lending a compassionate ear, being informed about resources, being empowered to use their best judgment," says Don Eron, who retired last academic year as a senior instructor of writing and rhetoric at the University of Colorado’s Boulder campus.

But Mr. Eron, who is a member of the Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure of the American Association of University Professors, says institutions should not use professors as the eyes and ears of the campus police or university lawyers.

"With Title IX," he says, "we've already seen how universities are more driven by fear of litigation or penalty than concern for victims."

[Vattel]

1. Yes they should

[Donald Ian Rankin]

2. No, absolutely not, unless the student is a minor.

Adult rape victims (by which in this context I mean anyone over 18, at least) should be allowed to make their own decisions about whom they do and don't tell, and they should be able to seek help and support from professors without having to tell the police if they don't want to.

[dballance]

15. Agreed.

I had to ponder this for a bit.

I believe one of the reasons K-12 educators and counselors are required to report is the victims are minors. In far too many of those cases the abuse is at the hands of a family member and not a stranger. CPS needs to get those kids out of that situation.

Once one is an adult there should be no mandatory reporting by educators. The victim should be able to feel assured they can seek help and counseling without the whole nasty event being dredged into the system without their consent. Do I believe that the counseling by professors should include them encouraging the victim to report the abuse to law enforcement? Absolutely.

However, some victims will be better served by being able to seek counseling without fear of having law enforcement involved. We need to encourage women (and some men) to seek counseling for a horrible event. If the law is that all these events must be reported then many people will not seek the help they need and require. I believe that is probably more true of adults who will feel the stress and shame of having been abused.

[moriah]

37. But the sooner it is reported, the better justice they will receive.

As a rape victim who wasn't sure whether to report a sexual assault or not, and given conflicting advice during the first 72 hours, it made it a lot harder for the police to take my case. The prosecuting attorney ended up refusing to even try to prosecute.

[davidpdx]

86. I agree, it needs to be left up to the victim

I am a professor, not in the US but overseas. If one of my female students confided me that they had been raped I would: 1) ask them if they want to talk about it; 2) make sure they know that it wasn't their fault; 3) ask if them if they need to go to a hospital; 4) ask them if they want to talk to the police and/or a mental health counselor; 5) assure them that anything they tell me is in confidence and I won't share it without their permission.

I just thought something I heard about at the school I work at and it makes me wonder. Another professor was telling a couple of us that a female student expressed to him more than once that she wanted to hurt herself. I have to wonder if in this case maybe she was raped and was asking for help. The professor said he didn't know what to do.

[Live and Learn]

17. +1 nt

[KMOD]

47. + 2

[kcr]

51. They have to consider the safety of other students

If they don't report it it puts other students in danger. Edited to clarify that I'm talking about if the report is involving another student or faculty member.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

79. They do, but consider the two scenarios:

1) Rape victims who do not want the police to know are able to talk to the faculty.
Result: Rape victims talk to the faculty, it stops there, and others are not warned, but the victim may be able to get some support.

2) Rape victims who do not want the police to know are not able to talk to the faculty.
Result: Rape victims do not talk to the faculty, and others are not warned.

Having a policy of always telling the police probably won't make the other students safer, it will just make fewer victims talk to the faculty.

I do agree that ,at a minimum, victims should always be asked for permission to tell the police, and probably encouraged/advised to give it, though.

[kcr]

92. I know. I understand that concern and share it.

I'm not exactly absolutely pro mandatory reporting, but I also think the situation is a bit different than just adults have a right to decide when to report, because of the circumstances that faculty members are in.

[raccoon]

96. ITA. nt

[Vattel]

3. Obama's Education Dept has been threatening to withhold funding from

universities if they do not ignore due process for those accused of sexual harassment or sexual assault. This is the sort of disrespect for the Bill of Rights that I have come to expect from Obama.

[geek tragedy]

6. Ted Cruz could not have said it any better .

Curse that Obama for looking out for victims of sexual assault!

[Vattel]

7. Yes, let's use a preponderance of the evidence standard for criminal sexual assault cases.

Cause we have to protect the victims at all costs.

[geek tragedy]

11. Now you are just making shit up.

Unless you have evidence to support your wackadoodle claim that Obama is withholding Title IX funds unless states rewrite their criminal statutes.

Definitely in Ted Cruz territory here.

[Vattel]

16. You missed my point.

I assume that you don't think that we should eliminate due process for criminal defendants in sexual assault cases. Obama is not suggesting that we should, of course. But Obama's department of education is forcing universities to ignore due process for those threatened with expulsion or termination in campus investigations of sexual harassment or sexual assault. And you are all for that.

[geek tragedy]

18. You have not specified what you mean by due process.

Preponderance of the evidence is due process under those circumstances.

[Vattel]

25. No it is not. Clear and convincing evidence would be a much better standard,

as nearly every top University recognized until forced to change its burden of proof. The Committee on Women in the Academic Profession of the AAUP also thinks the clear and convincing standard is better: http://www.aaup.org/NR/rdonlyres/FCF5808A-999D-4A6F-BAF3-027886AF72CF/0/officeofcivilrightsletter.pdf

The department of education is full of shit on this one.

[geek tragedy]

27. So, your complaint is that the new rule is that

if it is more likely than not that a man raped a classmate, he should be the one to leave rather than her.

Boo fucking hoo.

You will not find many progressives siding with your rw invocation of the bill of rights in an attempt to keep campuses consequence-free zones for rapists.

Now men will have to show about 1/100 the care women have to.

Note that the letter you linked to was re: sexual harassment and classroom activities, in other words academic freedom.

[Vattel]

29. The Committee on Women in the Academic Profession of the AAUP is sooo right wing. What a joke.

You are utterly clueless on this issue.

[geek tragedy]

30. That was faculty addressing allegations made

against faculty for statements made in the classroom.

[Vattel]

31. Read it again. It is a letter to the Dept of education arguing that they should withdraw

their demand that universities use a preponderance of the evidence standard for investigations of sexual harassment and sexual assault.

[geek tragedy]

35. The letter was about faculty and academic freedom.

Not about rights of accusing and accused students.

[Vattel]

41. yes it was about using a preponderance of evidence standard for determining

whether a faculty member is guilty of sexual harassment or sexual assault. It argued that a clear and convincing evidence standard is better. I agree.

[geek tragedy]

44. Yes, faculty concerns for academic freedom. As I said. nt

[Vattel]

45. so you agree with me that the preponderance of the ecidence standard is too high. Good.

Tell Obama.

ETA: "We believe that the widespread adoption of the preponderance of evidence standard for dismissal in cases involving charges of
sexual harassment would tend to erode the due‐process protections for academic freedom."

[geek tragedy]

48. No I don't agree with you since this is a completely

different context.

Student on student rape is irrelevant to academic freedom.

So your attempt to smear Obama for being too supportive of victims of sexual assault is a big wingnut MRA fail.

[Vattel]

59. Try to keep up. The Dept. of Education is demanding a preponderance of evidence

standard for sexual harassment and sexual assault complaints against faculty as well as against students. Get it? Or is that too difficult to understand?

[alcibiades_mystery]

67. I don't have enough likes to give for your take down of this MRA idiocy

Bravo.

What utter claptrap.

[Vattel]

138. Universities are changing their burden of proof for faculty dismissals

based on sexual misconduct because they fear losing federal funding if they do not. The new standards are being forced on universities by the Department of Education. They would not be adopted without coercion. I guess you think that is because professors are so right wing. I would recommend taking a basic course on due process.

[Ms. Toad]

98. A different burden of proof is not lack of due process.

Due process means the process that is due, under the circumstances. In the legal system, what process is due varies depending on the right being deprived - if it is your life, the process threshold is far higher than it is if your car is caught on a speed camera and the consequence is only a fine. For that matter, if the consequence of speeding is points on your license and conviction of a misdemeanor, the process threshold is higher than when it is merely a fine.

So the question is, what threshold is appropriate when the consequences are removal from campus. Whatever standard you use, even if you disagree with it, that is not a lack of due process.

[Vattel]

126. Thx for the introductory lecture on due process, but I don't really need it.

(I am currently writing a scholarly paper on due process.) My suggestion is that due process in the case at hand requires a higher burden of proof than a mere preponderance of the evidence.

[Ms. Toad]

135. Then you might want to edit this:

But Obama's department of education is forcing universities to ignore due process for those threatened with expulsion or termination in campus investigations of sexual harassment or sexual assault.

Ignoring due process is a very different thing than permitting a different process, including potentially a different burden of proof prior to the imposition of negative consequences. Ignoring due process would be just handing them an expulsion letter without any notice, or hearing.

In other words, I took your comments in this subthread as indicative of how well you understand due process. That is what prompted my explanation - clarifying what seemed to me to be a very superficial understanding of due process.

[moriah]

38. Do you really think there is no justice for men under university policies?

An expulsion is a hell of a lot kinder than prison, which is what they would have gotten if the victim went to the cops instead.

Most of those "boards" are a joke and the victims are actively deterred from filing criminal charges.

[Vattel]

43. What I think is that the new policies are unjust because the burden of proof is absurdly low.

Thus, the accused person (whether male or female) is not accorded due process.

[geek tragedy]

50. So you think justice is served by forcing the university

to act as if rape victims are lying if it's more likely than not that they're telling the truth, and forcing them to choose between being around their rapist or withdrawing and leaving campus themselves.

Crystal clear which gender's rights concern you.

Fortunately, President Obama is more progressive than you on this count.

[Vattel]

64. http://claremontindependent.com/title-ix-sexual-violence-the-preponderance-standard/

[Wella]

63. Universities are not equipped for investigations of felonies

And the campus police protects the university. Referring a rape victim directly to campus police--and not the metropolitan police--can result in the victim not getting justice. This has been the norm for quite some time. Now the DOE is telling universities if they are going to handle rape cases, they need to insure that perpetrators are expelled. The problem is that the university administration is not experienced in handling felonies: they are just trying to make problems go away.

Yes, expulsion is not a criminal history, and the young (usually) male does not go to jail, but if he is innocent, there is no real way to prove it in these university tribunals. There was a recent case here:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/11/03/sexual-harassment-policy-that-nearly-ruined-life/hY3XrZrOdXjvX2SSvuciPN/story.html

I would say more about what the accusation itself entailed if indeed I had such information. Under the informal complaint process, specific accusations are not disclosed to the accused, no fact-finding takes place, and no record is taken of the alleged misconduct. For the committee to issue an informal complaint, an accuser need only bring an accusation that, if substantiated, would constitute a violation of university policy concerning sexual misconduct. The informal “process” begins and ends at the point of accusation; the truth of the claim is immaterial.

When I demanded that fact-finding be done so that I could clear my name, I was told, “There’s nothing to clear your name of.” When I then requested that a formal complaint be lodged against me — a process that does involve investigation into the facts — I was told that such a course of action was impossible for me to initiate. At any time, however, my accuser retained the right to raise the complaint to a formal level. No matter, the Committee reassured me, the informal complaint did not constitute a disciplinary proceeding and nothing would be attached to my official record at Yale.

Coincidentally, the same day that my accuser decided to lodge the complaint against me, the news that I had been selected as a finalist for the Rhodes Scholarship had been publicly announced. The news gained national attention, with stories in every major media outlet in print and online, because of my position as Yale’s starting quarterback and the fact that my interview date was set for the same day as my last Harvard-Yale football game.

Days after the initial meeting with the University-Wide Committee on Sexual Misconduct, I received a phone call from the Rhodes Trust informing me that they had received an anonymous tip that I had been accused by a fellow student of sexual misconduct. Next came a call from my summer employer, who, having received a similar anonymous tip, rescinded my offer of full-time employment upon graduation.

Months later, long after I had already withdrawn my Rhodes candidacy, the New York Times somehow also learned of the “confidential” complaint made against me, and that the Rhodes Trust had been aware of it. The paper then published a lengthy article revising the narrative of my pursuit of the scholarship and suggesting that I had intentionally misled media into believing a feel-good sports story that never was. The Times’ public editor later condemned the piece for using anonymous sources, but the damage was already done; I was publicly humiliated. The memory of being told by the Committee that I had “nothing to clear my name of” was searing.

[Wella]

120. Have you seen the "Dear Colleague" letter from DOE?

If not, I'd suggest looking at it:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/dear_colleague_sexual_violence.pdf

[lumberjack_jeff]

28. 28 members of Harvard Law Faculty wrote the following letter.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/10/14/rethink-harvard-sexual-harassment-policy/HFDDiZN7nU2UwuUuWMnqbM/story.html

...As teachers responsible for educating our students about due process of law, the substantive law governing discrimination and violence, appropriate administrative decision-making, and the rule of law generally, we find the new sexual harassment policy inconsistent with many of the most basic principles we teach. We also find the process by which this policy was decided and imposed on all parts of the university inconsistent with the finest traditions of Harvard University, of faculty governance, and of academic freedom.

Among our many concerns are the following:

Harvard has adopted procedures for deciding cases of alleged sexual misconduct which lack the most basic elements of fairness and due process, are overwhelmingly stacked against the accused, and are in no way required by Title IX law or regulation. Here our concerns include but are not limited to the following:

■ The absence of any adequate opportunity to discover the facts charged and to confront witnesses and present a defense at an adversary hearing...

Worth reading the whole thing.

[Vattel]

32. They are so right on this one.

[geek tragedy]

33. What a shock--academics responsible for the failed policy

that coddled rapists upset they didn't get to drag out the process another decade.

94 faculty declined to sign that letter.

[branford]

56. Defendants are not rapists until convicted. "Alleged" is a very powerful word.

Individuals accused of rape have the same protections as any other criminal defendant, regardless of whether rape is difficult to prove in court, particularly in state run colleges and universities.

How about we let the criminal and civil justice system deal with alleged rapes? A university campus is not exempt from the requirements the rest of society must obey. If a rape is alleged, the university should report it to the police and local district attorney. College administrators lack the requisite training, expertise or legal mandate to essentially prosecute criminal rape allegations. More importantly, the most essential constitutional protections such as presumption of innocence, right to representation, cross-examination of witness, due process, etc., cannot, and should not, be sacrificed simply to tilt the scales of justice in favor of preferred social outcomes.

In fact, many universities are now being sued because of the ridiculous standards and procedures demanded by the Department of Education, as as these cases progress, the universities are losing badly or settling for large sums, often paid from the public purse.

[moriah]

123. And apparently victims aren't "victims" until their rapist has been convicted, in your eyes. n/t

[branford]

125. What is your point about "victims?"

Are you suggesting that as soon as an accusation is made, the accused is presumed guilty of being a rapist, and he (or she) should not be entitled to a proper defense because that would diminish the suffering of the victim?

Simply, an individual can certainly be a victim without an adjudication of guilt of the accused. Not all crimes can be proven, and that does not mean there were no victims.

The relevant issue, however, is that without a proper adjudication, you cannot punish the accused.

[moriah]

127. The way rape apologists always refer to victims as "accusers", never "victims".

It irks the hell out of me. Sure, there are people who make false accusations, who make real victims lives a living hell because it CAN be so damned difficult to prove.

In my case, the only attempt that was made was a recorded phone call, which I told them he wouldn't fall for. I was willing to wear a wire like a friend of mine did to get her stepfather who raped her behind bars, but the cops wouldn't let me, saying it'd look bad that I was willing to meet him to a jury. Or they just couldn't spare the officer to sit in the parking lot and listen, I don't know which. I wanted it to be a public place anyway, because I *did* feel uncomfortable being near him. But emails and texts where he admitted it weren't enough for the prosecutor.

But unless a rapist either admits it on tape or leaves evidence behind, it's nearly impossible to prove that rape occurred. They always say the sex was consensual. He even said, after I woke up during the act and fled his bedroom, but was too drunk to leave and didn't know what to do (now I would have knocked on other apartment doors screaming assault, but I was in shock after waking up to being raped), that he felt like a rapist. Wish I could have gotten that on tape.

But instead of believing victims, rape apologists call them "accusers" instead, say that maybe the victim was just drunk, not passed out, and regretted it, or wanted revenge, or a thousand other reasons why the person can't be a rapist.

[branford]

129. You really didn't address my point.

A discussion of semantics does not resolve the due process concerns related to the new Dept. of Education regulations and the ensuing legal uncertainty and potential liability.

For purposes of our discussion, in our hypothetical let's agree that a a female student was in fact sexually assaulted (a victim) and then filed a complaint with the university. Should the man (or woman) accused of the assault be presumed innocent and entitled to due process and an opportunity to adequately defend themselves against the charges? If after such recognized due process, guilt cannot be ascertained by any acceptable legal standard (civil or criminal), as you admit is often the case, should they still be punished?

No one is denying that sexual assault is a horrible and serious crime or, in many circumstances, very difficult to prove. Additionally, no one, including me, is belittling your personal circumstances (I don't even know you), whatever they may be. However, obviating Constitutional protections and the underpinnings of western jurisprudence is not the morally or legally appropriate means to fight campus sexual assault.

Based on your post, it appears that district attorney and/or police might not have taken you claim seriously or engaged in a diligent investigation. I would suggest revising the procedures on how sexual assault claims are investigated and prosecuted by the government authorities might be the more appropriate avenue of reform, rather than ignoring or eviscerating the fundamentals of our justice system.

[moriah]

133. My circumstances sucked.

I think the emails should have been put up in front of a jury. If they couldn't find him guilty, that'd be one thing, but at least I would have been able to testify, in court, about what my rapist did to me. They were also investigating the rape of a child at the same time, and it was a small town. So small of a town I was afraid that he'd come knocking on my door drunk and angry after being questioned and released. I asked for a no-contact order, they didn't grant one. (I wanted there to be one on file so if I had to shoot the bastard -- since at that time I did have a gun, fat lot of good it did me -- there'd at least be something backing me as to why I was so afraid I felt I had to shoot if he broke into my house.)

But not even being able to testify and give a jury a chance of a finding of guilt or not-guilt.... it really wrecked me emotionally. It put me in the hospital because I was suicidal, making me sell my gun to my sister later when I moved because I didn't trust myself with a firearm after that. I was out of work for over a month in a partial hospitalization program, and so when I caught pneumonia later on that year they had to let me go because I'd used up all my leave time. I'd been diagnosed with bipolar disorder in my 20s, and not only did it cause me to spiral into a deep depression, I also have PTSD as a result of the experience. After four hospitalizations in a year and a half, I was granted disability.

If it hadn't been for that jackass deciding he had a right to my body when I couldn't consent and had already told him prior to taking my first drink that I had no intentions of having sex with him, I'd probably still have a job and not be on the government dole. And that hurts my pride a hell of a lot.

So no, I don't think a whole lot about his "rights". He didn't think much of mine, did he?

As is obvious, if I'm ever called on a jury to decide if a person should be deprived of life, liberty, or property in a sexual assault case, I'll have to recuse myself. But in my opinion, an expulsion deprives one of none of that, and that's the worst punishment that can happen to a rapist under Title IX. It's a fucking joke, those "boards" are, because they keep real cases from the courtroom and encourage victims to keep silent and let the university handle it. Going to university is not a right under the Constitution.

[Oktober]

78. Any other crimes that you are good with "Accusation is proof enough"?

[geek tragedy]

90. You prefer the sharia rule requiring three

witnesses?

[Oktober]

94. I prefer the American legal standard of "Innocent until proven guilty"

Different strokes for different folks I suppose. Better hope you stay on everyone's good side...

[geek tragedy]

95. This doesn't involve criminal proceedings and

preponderance of the evidence still requires proof.

So what's your beef?

[Oktober]

97. The point is spread across the posts in this thread...

You are just trying as hard as you can to ignore it...

[geek tragedy]

99. Am I interested in protecting rapists? No. nt

[Oktober]

101. Good thing you seem to magically know who is a rapist and who isn't..

You should go into business...

[Ykcutnek]

8. First they came for the rapists, and I said nothing... nt

[Vattel]

10. yes, lets get rid of due process for those accused of rape. That is so progressive.

[geek tragedy]

12. You are the one claiming without evidence that he

is doing away with due process.

Just like the Ted Cruz crowd does.

Here is a hint: preponderance of the evidence is not a violation of due process if there is no risk of incarceration.

[Vattel]

65. Here is a hint: due process requires more than a preponderance of the evidence

in many areas of the law where incarceration is not at stake. Examples: criminal trials where the penalty is not incarceration, deportation cases, cases where parental rights are at stake, civil commitment cases. Even in areas where a preponderance of the evidence is an appropriate standard, there are many procedural protections for the defendant that are lacking in University sexual misconduct investigations.

[Ykcutnek]

14. ...

Colleges are required under the gender equity law Title IX to investigate and respond to reports of sexual assault and harassment on campus. If OCR were to determine a college was not compliant with Title IX, it could yank federal funding from the school, something it has never done with a higher education institution.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/30/colleges-under-investigation-sex-assault_n_5543694.html

Title IX has the support of the ACLU:

Title IX, a groundbreaking statute intended to end sex discrimination in education, became the law of the land on June 23, 1972. While most famous for its requirement that schools provide girls with equal athletic opportunities, the law applies to all educational programs that receive federal funding, and to all aspects of a school's educational system. Title IX benefits both boys and girls and is the lynchpin of 40 years of efforts to promote and establish gender equity in schools.

The ACLU Women's Rights Project advocates for educational equality under Title IX in four key areas: sex-segregation and sex stereotypes in education, pregnant and parenting teens' rights, gender-based violence, and athletics.

Established in 1972, the same year Title IX went into effect, the Women's Rights Project was has been fighting for women's equality and empowerment ever since. With the help of ACLU affiliates across the country, the ACLU has garnered huge successes in preserving and promoting Title IX's goal of gender equity over the past 40 years.

https://www.aclu.org/title-ix-gender-equity-education

[Vattel]

139. Title IX does not require a preponderance of the evidence standard. The AAUP is opposed to that

standard and should be. My guess is that the ACLU would agree with the AAUP, but I haven't looked to see if they have taken sides on this.

[uppityperson]

22. HOW is reporting something to the police doing away with due process?

[Vattel]

26. I am in favor of that requirement. I was talking about something else.

[Wella]

112. The police WILL give you due process: the university, not so much

KC Johnson has written a lot on this.

[BainsBane]

137. You don't understand the legal issues here

What due process has DOJ violated in regard to accused rapists? You don't understand that their action is against universities, not individuals. DOJ has no jurisdiction over accused rapists. Their jurisdiction is over colleges, and they can determined whether a college is in violation of Title IX and should have their funding stripped. Now that would be a major bummer for a university, but it doesn't violate any accused rapist's due process rights.

Then you make the absurd claim that DOJ's enforcement of the 14th amendment is violation of the Bill of Rights. Do you understand that the 14th is also part of the constitution? Or could it be you don't really know what the term "Bill of Rights" actually means?

Leftism and progressivism have actual meanings. There is a widespread tendency to define them as relating entirely to self: if I believe something it must be leftist.
A simple fact is that a view that excludes the majority of the population from constitutional protection cannot be considered either leftist or progressivism, particularly if it is a view advanced by segments of the far right.

Perhaps if you got your information from respected news sources rather than websites that have decided this is about due process rights of men, you'd have a better understanding of the constitutional issues involved?

[Vattel]

141. You don't understand the legal issues here.

The Department of Education is coercing universities to deny due process to faculty members who face dismissal due to alleged sexual misconduct.

[bettyellen]

132. LOL, no. Still at it, I see!

[BainsBane]

136. Of course

The bill of rights REQUIRES that civil rights law be ignored, that women be made to understand that they have no right to consent, and that universities work tirelessly to ensure rapists have unfettered access to fresh victims.

I know this comes as a shock to you, but women are citizens of this country (awful, I know). To allow the kind of RAPE CULTURE that proliferates on college campuses with no regard to the safety and rights of women is a violation of title IX , made possible by the Fourteenth Amendment to the constitution. Now I'll well aware of the right-wing position that only the first ten amendments (the Bill of Rights) to the constitution count and that the the 14th amendment is particularly odious because it extends constitutional protection to the nation's undesirables, like me.

While it may seem like the ability to rape without facing any consequences is a constitutional right, given how seldom rapists are actually punished, but it actually isn't. DOJ has judged that allowing a climate of violence against women is violation of the 14th amendment, just as the failure to prosecute racially motivated hate crimes violates the 14th. Those of us who care about equal protection would like to see DOJ invoke federal law to clamp down on prosecutors offices, but as yet DOJ has sought only to use title IX for colleges and universities, which face a higher legal burden because they take federal funding.

Now I know we're only talking about students who are overwhelmingly women, whose importance is clearly less than male sexual predators. (It's not like women are real citizens covered by real constitutional rights). Naturally the idea that any rapists might have to face prosecution for a crime is unacceptable. THAT must be stopped. Rape victims must be made to understand the constitution does not apply to them. After all, Scalia was quite clear on the subject that equal rights do not extend to women. Clearly the Bill of Rights was intended to protect male felons to the exclusion of uppity women who actually have the nerve to think they have a right to decide who they have sex with. Clearly the 2% conviction rate for rape is a travesty for rapists who should know that they face absolutely zero chance (not just a 2 percent chance) of ever facing prison.

Leaving aside the sarcasm for a minute: harassment and assault are two separate issues. Assault is a criminal matter; harassment a civil one. That you insist on conflating the two would itself be objectionable, if you hadn't trumped that by making the absurd claim that DOJ was violating the Bill of Rights in seeking to enforce the 14th Amendment. Perhaps you could enlighten us as to which of the first ten amendments requires institutions of higher education to allow rape to go prosecuted? Then there is the fact you don't even seem to get that DOJ's action is against universities, not accused rapists.

[jen63]

4. Yes absolutely!

Rape victims too afraid to go to the police need counseling and some one to guide them through the court system. They need advocacy, not being ignored.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

20. Telling the police without their consent *is* ignoring them.

Whether or not to tell the police should be their decision; if they don't want to then that decision should be respected.

[pnwmom]

70. It isn't being ignored -- it's not forcing them to get involved with the police

if they don't want to.

I am not a teacher but I had a young adult woman confide a rape to me. She doesn't want to go to the police. She should be able to seek out counseling from people she trusts without the fear that they will report to the police.

[ZombieHorde]

5. Not if the student is an adult.

I think young adults should feel safe when confiding with their professors about their personal struggles, their hopes, their fears, etc. Bringing cops into the situation will likely lead to the students not confiding with their trusted professors, especially if the student belongs to a racial minority since so many cops hate nonwhites, and this can easily increase feelings of isolation and alienation. Sometimes people don't want to make their personal trials into a big production.

[petronius]

9. On my campus, faculty and staff who become aware of a sexual assault

are required to report it to the Title IX officer - including names, if known. I think it's a good requirement, although I think it's one that students should be aware of before revealing any confidences...

[marions ghost]

93. right

---

[Oktober]

13. Nope...

I like the military model..

Restricted and unrestricted...

One is a mandated report and subsequent investigation and the other just is a pathway to care. Wishes of the victim...

[Live and Learn]

19. Only if you don't want rape victims to be able to confide in a professor.

Obviously, a rape victim that confides in a professor with an admonition not to tell anyone would not confide in the professor if the victim knew the professor was mandated to tell.

People really need to think these things through and quit making laws/policies based on emotion.

[KMOD]

49. Yes, 100% in agreement. n/t

[Jefferson23]

21. If they're going down this road for adults, they had better be prepared

to do an extensive level of full disclosure before accepting any students.

Probably with a signature to the fact they have read and understand the
conditions.

[uppityperson]

23. I strongly believe in mandated reporting for those who are unable to stand for themselves, for

children and elders. Mandated reporting for child abuse or elder abuse is fine. But not for adult abuse.

[bluestateguy]

24. Almost all college students are legal adults

and professors are not counselors, therapists, psychologists or health professionals.

So I say, that is a bad idea.

[moriah]

34. I'm torn here.

I think they should have to report to the university under the Clery Act, if it was a fellow student.

That still gives the student the option of going to the police, or having it "handled" in-house.

But a person doesn't magically become an adult the moment they turn 18 but at 17 and 364 days is a child -- it's a process they go through to grow up. An 18-year-old who confides in a professor should at the very least be counseled on how to report it, to the school's Clery Act board, at the least, but also told of their legal rights. A mandated reporter status for Clery Act purposes, not to the regular police, would at least make sure that the rapist, if a fellow student, got some kind of punishment and the statistics on campus assaults would be truthful.

Even if the "punishment" doled out by those boards is very little.

[petronius]

53. That's largely how it is for us - the required report is not to police, but rather

to the Title IX officer (the Dean of Students, here). The Title IX officer is in turn required to (attempt to) meet with the victim. Beyond that, there is no mandate for law enforcement involvement, judicial affairs proceedings, or for the victim to accept the meeting with the Title IX officer.

I support the reporting requirement for two reasons: 1) it immediately puts the victim in contact with the most effective conduit to support resources that the school has available and the best source of information regarding the victim's rights and options, and 2) when the school becomes aware--even at the lowly level of an individual faculty/staff member--of dangers, crimes, hostile environments and so on there is a responsibility to explore ways of enhancing the safety of the community at large.

My main caveat would be that students should be aware of the mandatory reporting requirement and who it applies to, as well as those entities on/around campus to whom the requirement does not apply...

[branford]

57. Alleged violent felonies should never be handled "in-house."

They are a serious criminal matter and should always be handled by the criminal justice system. College administrators lack the training, expertise and legal mandate to adjudicate criminal matters, and expose the university and administrators to significant liability to any mistakes or lack of due process.

Nevertheless, the decision to report a crime, particularly one with social ramifications like a sexual assault, should always be made by the alleged adult victim. An adult is more than capable of making such a decision, and a mandatory reporting requirement would only dissuade victims from seeking the advice and support of those professors and administrators whom they trust and worsen their ordeal.

An adult crime victim is nothing like a minor child or someone unable to care for themselves due to age, infirmity or mental disease or defect. Infantilizing adults is condescending and ultimately counterproductive to encouraging the reporting of sexual assaults.

[Sgent]

82. Of course they should

The university should suspend a student who committed a felony, possibly while an investigation is ongoing, to protect other students. They may very well decide to suspend or expel a student who meets the burden civilly, even if they are never prosecuted.

The school should encourage victims to report it to the police, but the school certainly has a reason to do an internal investigation even if its not reported by the student.

On a different note, schools are prevented by law from reporting an alleged perpetrator (who is a student) to the police, although a victim student can report it.

[branford]

85. A student hasn't "committed a felony" until they're actually convicted of a felony.

There is no presumption of guilt (or liability) in either the criminal or civil justice systems. Moreover, even in the civil justice system, you are entitled to an attorney, have access to all evidence, can cross-examine witnesses, have an impartial judge and jury, etc. The Dept. of Education regulations provide far fewer overall protections than either a civil or criminal trial, and was basically designed to ensure a finding of guilt. The background to the regulations were that guilty verdicts were difficult to achieve in rape cases, so they simply wanted to rig (or displace) the current system. Are there any other crimes where the Constitution shouldn't apply in order to achieve a desired result?

No one is suggesting that a school not engage in an internal investigation. However, minimal safeguards and protections must be maintained and guilt certainly cannot be presumed. In state institutions full criminal protections might be required.

Schools that have followed the regulations are now engaged in a series of lawsuits. Schools cannot, in essence, convict someone of rape and end their academic association, with little more than an accusation while preventing a thorough and fair defense. University administrators are simply not trained or equipped to investigate and prosecute felonies, nor do they have a legal mandate to do so. As the number of lawsuits grow and liability risks increase, no less when some allegations are actually proven untrue, the schools will quickly realize that becoming a substitute court for sexual assault is a no win proposition.

If an adult student claims to be the victim of sexual assault, a university should recommend that the student speak with the police or district attorney. If the school has reason to believe that the alleged perpetrator presents an ongoing danger, they need to prove the danger clearly exists before taking action that damages the student. A student (or anyone else) should never have to prove their innocence, either de jure or de facto, and mere accusations are rarely sufficient even under a civil preponderance of the evidence standard.

http://chronicle.com/article/College-Lawyers-Confront-a/147349/

http://articles.philly.com/2014-07-21/news/51786324_1_sexual-misconduct-balancing-act-court-filings

http://www.mindingthecampus.com/2014/08/four-straight-legal-victories-for-due-process/

http://www.mindingthecampus.com/2014/02/why_have_a_hearing_just_expel_/

http://www.mindingthecampus.com/2014/03/a_first-accused_of_rape_xavie/

http://www.mindingthecampus.com/2014/09/depauw-punishment-halted-in-sex-case/

[moriah]

119. I went to college as a minor. Still 16 when I had my first class, lived on-campus.

Kids in college aren't always adults. And it's not like they magically go from "child" to "adult" in any sense except legally -- there's no real maturity difference between a 17 and 364 day old "child" the next day when they're an 18 year old "adult". Most still aren't of age to drink alcohol, for example (though I have to wonder why you can fight and die for your country but can't have a beer) while in college, we acknowledge that they are not sufficiently mature enough to make all decisions for themselves, and that they should still be guided.

While I agree that going through legal channels is best, and anyone who discloses should be guided toward those channels, often times law enforcement doesn't have enough evidence to convict -- clothing wasn't torn, etc (and yes, I know what it's like to report a rape to the police when there's not enough evidence). Or the victim doesn't want to go through a trial. They should still have the option to not have to go to school with their rapist without having to change schools themselves. I had to move to a different town because I was too afraid of running into him.

And since the boards are so fucking useless, it's not likely that if the victim doesn't want to push it that they'll do much other than record that the event was alleged to have occurred.

[branford]

121. Your post proves my argument.

First, if a minor (16 years old) claims they were sexually assaulted, mandatory reporting requirements may be applicable and different rules and laws will be at issue. However, even if a minor is the accuser, a defendant does not lose any constitutional rights or protections.

Second, despite your protestations, the law does in fact "magically" recognize a difference when someone turns 18. They are no longer considered a minor under the vast majority of laws (although, as an aside, I agree that the age 21 drinking age has its problems). I am not in the habit of infantalizing adults in order to achieve desired social policy. I believe women to be more than capable of making their own decisions.

Third, and most importantly, you appear to support schools handling sexual assault cases, rather than the criminal or civil justice system, simply because it achieves the results you desire. Simply, sexual assault is a serious felony, and must be treated like one.

If a student is accused of a sexual assault, they are still presumed innocent, and entitled to the full panoply of due process protection. An alleged victim should not be able to end another's academic career and tarnish their reputation for life based on an accusation and without the ability for the accused to adequately defend themselves. You and many others apparently support overall standards far lower than even civil proceedings simply to tip the scales. There is no rape exception to the Constitution.

I expect that the accused students will continue to prevail in lawsuits against the universities that implement the "presumed guilty" policies. I next expect that the accusers will also be sued in greater numbers. Soon enough, these matters will be adjudicated in court, except the alleged victims will be the defendants.

[moriah]

122. I love the word "accuser". It's easy to see where sympathies lie.

I won't waste my time any further arguing with you. I know exactly where you stand.

(Edit: And I'm sure you think it was right for the prosecutor not to prosecute in my case, instead of letting a jury hear us testify and determine which one they believed. There was no physical evidence, after all. All my fault for daring to get drunk in front of someone I thought I could trust -- someone big and strong enough to carry me from the couch where I passed out to their bed. I was just an "accuser", not a victim.)

[branford]

124. Yes, you were an accuser until an adjudication,

and the accused was an alleged rapist or defendant. I'm sorry you suffered, but it in no way changes the fact the accused was innocent until proven guilty, and your accusation did not change the nature of western jurisprudence and the Constitutional due process requirements.

If you were the victim of a sexual assault, you were right to go to the local district attorney. However, under the canons of ethics under which all prosecutors operate, if he or she did not have a good faith belief that there was sufficient evidence to prove that you were assaulted by the defendant beyond any reasonable doubt, they were ethically bound to not prosecute. No one has the "right" to have their claims heard by a criminal jury, and that is why the state is the prosecutor in such matters. These rules apply to all crimes, accusers and defendants, not just sexual assault. Unfortunately, many sexual assault cases are very difficult to prove. Nevertheless, legal rules and protections are fairly immutable. You could have also sued the perpetrator in civil court, but you would still bear the burden of proof and require some evidence (although less than in a criminal trial).

Accusing me of inadequate sympathy for you is ridiculous. My sympathies lie with Constitution. No one should be tarred a violent felon without due process of law and other related protections, and sympathy is not a substitute for evidence.

I find it ironic and disturbing that most liberals strongly defend all the protections provided to criminal defendants, including the often accused and harassed minority youth (I'm an attorney and active on this issue), yet somehow believe there is a rape exception to the Constitution. There is not.

I anticipate that schools who follow the veritable "presumed guilty / no defense" rules will continue to find themselves on the losing end of expensive and embarrassing lawsuits, and the accusers may also find themselves as defendants in court. Is is unconscionable that enlightened people would try to skew the justice system in order to fix the "correct" result.

[moriah]

128. So you say that I wasn't raped unless a jury says so?

I want to say something that would get my post hidden, but would rather not have to bother a DU jury. So pretend I said it anyway.

[branford]

130. Simply, no. I've said nothing of the sort.

As I've indicated to you in other portions of this thread, the complaints about the new Dept. of Education regulation concern due process afforded the accused.

The regulations essentially presume the guilt of the accused, and deny them any reasonable opportunity to defend themselves from a claim that they committed a serious felony. No one should be punished, either in a court of law or university proceeding, without the presumption of innocence, accepted due process protections, and demonstrable proof of guilt, regardless of whether the allegations concerns sexual assault or anything else.

If evidence of the accused's guilt cannot be ascertained under well accepted and longstanding legal guidelines and principles, they should not be punished.

As the many lawsuits against the universities now suggest, these victims may indeed see the inside of a courtroom. However, because of the shortsightedness and activism of the Dept. of Education, rather than a criminal prosecution, these individuals will be defendants and witnesses in civil suits and potentially facing judgment in favor of their attackers.

[bettyellen]

131. I'm thinking what you are.

He is deliberately taunting you by expressing "detached doubt" that you were indeed a victim in your case. I have a feeling he gets his jollies that way, actually. Those posts are reeking of it.

[geek tragedy]

36. Report that a rape occurred, but with no id'ing

of the victim.

[alp227]

39. the overwhelming answer would be "yes" after the Jerry Sandusky scandal. nt

[pnwmom]

71. It is different for adult victims than it is for minors.

Adults should be able to make their own decision about reporting or not. Children must be protected, so the decision cannot be left to them.

[alp227]

75. Regardless, rape is rape. I don't like the semantics being played in this thread between children &

adults.

[pnwmom]

76. Rape is rape. But adults have the right not to report if they choose to not report.

This isn't a question of semantics. This is acknowledging the right of adult rape victims to make their own choices and to respect their privacy.

The rape was the first violation. They shouldn't be violated again by being put through a criminal justice procedure that they don't want to be a part of.

[branford]

87. Do you really believe the differences between an adult and minor child to be mere semantics?

No one is denying the serious of a rape allegation, but society and the law treats adults and minors very differently.

For instance, sexual contact with a young child actually constitutes different crimes that "basic" rape , minors generally cannot consent to sexual contact, and the law often acts on its own to protect children when an adult has the choice to forgo a legal complaint.

All mandatory reporting statutes do with respect to adults, particularly young women, is to infantalize them, and if actually a victim of sexual violence, to deny them choice and free will for a second time. In purportedly looking out for their interests, society become their new abusers. Adult women are more than capable of deciding if, how and when to file a criminal or civil complaint if sexually assaulted.

[Niko]

40. FUCK NO

Unless it's a child who is being raped, nobody has a right to report anything to anybody other than the rape victim herself. You can't force a victim to face that kind of thing if the victim is not ready. If I were the professor I would strongly URGE the victim to report it, but I wouldn't betray a confidence like that, which would just inflict more psychological damage.

[dilby]

42. This would be like raping the woman twice.

If a woman confides in a faculty member something horrible that happened to her, she should feel safe in knowing that what she tells will be confidential. Hopefully the faculty member will provide proper guidance and will convince her to report it herself but to go behind her back and make her face something she may not be ready to would be a terrible injustice.

[HereSince1628]

46. Everywhere I worked as a professor, expressed danger to self and others

to a professor wasn't protected with confidentiality.

The only exceptions I was told of were for licensed religious counselors, who received the information as part of seeking to make a ritual confession...

Typically, I never learned of a rape. I did learn of an assault by an intimate partner, and I reported it to the Dean of Students...

I was also asked by a student if I could hold confidence about a roommate. And I said not if it involves something that endangers anyone.

[branford]

58. Lack of confidentiality is not remotely the same as mandatory reporting.

Without confidentiality, like advice from an attorney, doctor or religious adviser, it simply permits such an individual to be compelled to act as a witness in an appropriate proceeding. However, a mandatory reporting requirement compels an individual to immediately betray a confidence, even against their own judgment.

[HereSince1628]

60. I'm not teaching anymore, it's now mandatory at many schools

and I have no problem with that.

Lots of slack is given college students by local police. There is a sense that the college has a system of dealing with crimes.

But they don't. Colleges have systems of trying to 'grow' students out of their behavioral problems.

Crimes against others really are crimes, and need to dealt with as such.

Hiding things isn't good. We had a police officer killed in this community, and her 'friends' had been told by the victim that her husband was threatening her. That silence was among adults,who imo as police officers should have known better...

But when the population potentially at risk includes minors, the institution has a responsibility to be as protective as would be parents.

[branford]

61. Universities are not populations of at risk minors.

They are legal adults, and should be treated as adults both with respect to mandatory reporting / deciding whether to report a crime and dealing with alleged crimes in the criminal justice system, rather than "in-house."

Protecting vulnerable minors is a very different circumstance, and few oppose mandatory reporting of crimes against minors, no less sexual assaults.

[loyalsister]

52. No

People can make up their own minds. And, just as if a person confides domestic abuse, no one should be required to report it because there is no guarantee that the rapist\abuser if not an integral part of the person's life and would not seek retribution.

[Puzzledtraveller]

54. If the incident could be reported to campus safety

without identification so it can at least be logged as an event I would be okay with that. It would be policy of the school. I would not support that the event be reported to the police. I was a assistant chief campus safety at a fairly large community college. Our biggest concern was with reporting of the incident so we could track safety of students and this was something the public could view at any time online but it did not require that person to give us names of victims or perpetrators and suspects. That was better for us as more people came forward having knowledge of various crimes when they knew they did not have to disclose their own name, or names of the people involved. The information was enough for us to evaluate and make corrective actions as in more lighting in parking areas, bike officer escorts etc.

[AngryAmish]

55. I went to college at seventeen.

And I was damned that they were going to tell me anything about life. That is not their job. Their job is to teach me things. And the hours I was not in those walls was my own.

All my experience with college officials were mostly awful.

[daredtowork]

62. They should respect the student's wishes and keep their trust

But they should also encourage the student to report it: especially if the incident just occurred and evidence is at stake.

People who are in jobs where they might be perceived as trusted advisers should receive training in this area and know what the resources are.

Under no circumstances should they start to treat someone who is going through a crisis as a "procedure" or an "it" - that dehumanizes them.

Unless they are threatening imminent harm to themselves are others (and even in that case, use some judgment) which might require immediate referral to psychological crisis services, the student is the one who has all the factors of the situation in mind. Let them make the decision. Let them have the dignity of owning the situation. Listen first to what they need first.

[daredtowork]

72. huh?

If students start talking to a professor on a casual basis, how are they a priori to know they are not to be trusted?

Students are adults: they deserve the dignity of making this decision - especially after such a horrible thing happens.

It would be a terrible betrayal of trust for a professor who was previously perceived as a "friend" to turn out to be a procedural "rat" instead.

[Wella]

73. So you'd report it to the university power structure before the young woman goes to the real police?

As a tenured professor, you must know that the administration is not really about the protection of the students but about the protection of the university and its reputation.

[renegade000]

74. Having just completed Title IX orientation a week ago

They were very clear that orientation for undergraduate students explains the reporting requirements and gives several resources that are available for confidential counsel.

I left the meeting feeling positively that now there is a systemic effort to actual address these difficult issues with due process and concern for the victim, instead of just having college professors and administrators try to wing it. All the mandatory report would result in is a call from the Title IX office to the student letting him or her know about the various resources and options open to him or her. Clearly, if the student wants to pursue some form of investigation, they will be interviewed, but the student has no obligation at this point to give any information, they can just say, "thanks for the concern, but I don't feel comfortable talking about it." And that's that.

This seems pretty reasonable to me

[Hekate]

81. +1

[Sgent]

84. FERPA

regulations mean you cannot report it to the police. The victim has to give permission, or you have receive a subpoena first. Check with your schools Title IX official or general counsel.

Edited to add: you can disclose to the Title IX official within the school as FERPA allows for internal use of student information.

[Behind the Aegis]

77. No, but they should encourage it.

It is always best to put the victim FIRST. Do not inflict further harm by taking away power from a victim; that is why s/he is talking with you! If you are not equipped to provide comfort, and many are not, and there is no shame in that, be prepared to know the appropriate resources. The ONLY time I would break confidence is if I felt the victim was going to be victimized again by the attacker. It is, of course, necessary to know the rules of your particular institution and to make sure any one who may "confess" something to you, to make them aware of your obligations.

[Hekate]

80. In California, certain professionals are mandatory reporters regardless of victims's age

At least that is my understanding of the law, which has been in place for over two decades now.

[Wella]

113. Regardless of the victim's age?

I'd like to see that law. I'm in California and I never heard of mandatory reporting for adult victims. Perhaps it refers to adults in care facilities, like rest homes or for the less abled, like Downs syndrome adults?

[aikoaiko]

83. Sadly this will have a chilling effect on student-faculty mentor relationships.

It would probably be better to mandate referral contact information to campus safety, counseling, and/or local police.

[Jamastiene]

88. Yes, because if you know about a crime, not reporting it is a crime.

Or at least, that is what I have always been taught. Something to do with aiding and abetting after the fact.

[mfcorey1]

89. When I taught school, it was required to report it. eom

[Orrex]

105. What grades?

[mfcorey1]

106. All

[Orrex]

107. Kindergarten through post-grad college? Impressive!

[mfcorey1]

109. My point was that even before college, teachers had to report rape and ideations if they had

knowledge of them. Peace

[Orrex]

110. Well, that's kind of the key issue, isn't it?

The overwhelming majority of college students are adults, so it's reasonable to conclude that the requirements for reporting rape would be different than if the victim is six years old.

[mmonk]

91. I would think school counselor to be a good idea.

[Tatiana]

100. Yes. It's a crime.

It should be investigated as a crime.

If the victim chooses not to cooperate or press charges, that is their prerogative. However, this puts would-be rapists on notice that their crimes will not be swept under the rug. Hopefully, the victim will be treated with dignity and respect as the process plays out.

[ladjf]

102. I'm not a lawyer, but my guess is that unless the teacher's employer has a contractual statement

requiring the disclosure of that type of personal information, the teacher isn't statutorily required to report it. However, there are constructive things that could and should be done. Namely, with the approval of the student, the teacher should report the incident to the Dean of Woman asking her to get involved. Active and appropriate professional mental health guidance and support would be made available for the student including the involvement of local police.

[Stargazer09]

103. No, they should not

(Unless the victim is a minor.)

I was forced to report my rape in college, threatened by staff to whom I had not even confided. (A male friend I confided in, who was apparently jealous that some other guy got more "action" then he did, told the staff.)

It was awful. Humiliating. And it destroyed my trust in the college and staff, as well as my ability to trust any man on the planet. (I've gotten better at that, but it took a long time.)

Nobody should be forced to report a rape. A professor can, and should, provide information and resources to the victim.

[Orrex]

104. Hey, maybe we could require the victim's photo to be posted publicly, too

as a further disincentive to report the rape in the first place.


IMO if the victim confides in a professor, the professor should ask if the victim wants him or her to report it and should encourage the victim to seek formal counseling as well.

But mandatory reporting for an adult victim? I find that grossly intrusive.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

108. Crimes should be reported, correct? Am I missing something here?

Seems that I recall certain people are granted immunity from this ... am I right?

Lawyers?
Spouses?
Priests?
Psychiatrists?
Journalists/Reporters?

[Wella]

111. It depends on where you're reporting them

I'm all for reporting crimes to the real police. I don't trust university rent-a-cops to handle this stuff. They are under the control of the university and will protect the institution, not the victim.

[Blue_Tires]

114. Journos wouldn't have any immunity in this situation...

And I have no idea why a source would confide to a journalist that he or she had been raped unless they wanted that information to be printed...

[wickerwoman]

116. There isn't a generally legal obligation to report a crime

http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/failure-to-report-a-crime.html

unless you are a mandatory reporter, you are helping to conceal a crime or you live in certain states and then only for specific kinds of crimes.

Lawyers/Priests/Psychiatrists etc. have a professional code of ethics that covers confidentiality (in the case of lawyers, spouses and journalists so that they cannot be compelled to report). Psychiatrists are mandatory reporters and their code of ethics requires them to report if someone intends to cause bodily harm to another person but I don't think that's a legal requirement.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

117. Okay, thanks. Could not decide if this was a Legal or a Moral question/obligation.

[wickerwoman]

115. No. It disempowers victims.

An adult victim of a crime should have the choice to report it or not and to press charges or not.

One of my roommates in college was raped and I tried to convince her to report it. She was mortified, thought the police wouldn't believe her, was terrified that her fundamentalist father would find out, was repulsed by the idea of anyone touching her to collect evidence, didn't want to have to keep talking about it.

Finally I just backed off because at the end of the day it was her decision, her body, and she needed to process what had happened in her own time.

What benefit would come of professors reporting that someone has been raped other than the victim being forced to submit to police questioning (which is not always particularly enlightened or sympathetic)?

On the other hand, if the professor has some evidence about who the rapist is, or if someone confesses that they have raped someone, then I think the professor has an obligation to report it.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

118. I tend to agree in regards to adults, I would respect their wishes whichever way. n/t

[markpkessinger]

134. Most college students are legal adults . . .

. . . and thus, unless they are minors, the decision regarding whether to report a rape that happened to an adult college student must be an act of that student's own agency as an emancipated adult. Full stop.

[bigwillq]

140. No (nt)

[Takket]

142. Absolutely yes

A professor/student relationship is not bound by the same privilege that exists for more intimate relationships such as a person and their spouse, doctor, lawyer or clergy.