The statistics in the White House’s recently released report on rape and sexual assault are unsettling, but not unfamiliar: If a woman goes to college, she has a one in five chance of being sexually assaulted while she’s there. Only 12 percent of those women ever report their assaults to law enforcement.
Just a few hours after the report came out last week, President Obama issued a memorandum, creating a task force to deal specifically with issues surrounding sexual assault on college campuses. In 90 days, this task force will make recommendations for how institutions can best prevent and respond to sexual assault, and punish offenders. They are charged with creating an environment where victims feel supported—where punishment is fair but also proportionate to the severity of the crime.
This isn’t going to be easy. Responding to sexual assault—particularly on a college campus—is murky business. Between 80 and 90 percent of campus sexual assaults happen between two people who know each other. That means that a typical college victim is going to feel a lot of different emotions. She might want the perpetrator off campus so she doesn’t have to worry about running into him on the way to class. But, at the same time, she might be scared of how their mutual friends will react when he’s in danger of expulsion. It’s not uncommon for a victim to report her assault, only to backtrack a few days later, begging administrators not to take the case any further. All this can be frustrating for university officials. If there is no one clear, best way to help all victims, how can they be expected to draft effective policies?
Over the next 90 days, the White House task force will be trying to navigate this delicate situation—creating programs and policies that will work for the vast majority of victims, perpetrators, and college administrators. The task force will talk to people with all kinds of perspectives on the issue: school officials, parents, victims, athletic coaches, fraternity representatives, student activists, law enforcement agencies, and sexual assault crisis counselors.
“I think the task force will tell the Department of Education to put penalties on schools if they don’t comply with certain policies,” said Alexandra Brodsky, Founder of Know Your IX, an organization devoted to educating college women about their Title IX rights. “I can also see them issuing a set of ‘best practices.’ These wouldn’t be laws, but firm suggestions for how sexual assault cases should be handled by colleges.”
Here’s what the task force needs to understand when it’s coming up with those best practices: Sweeping policies that crack down hard on perpetrators often have the unintended result of discouraging victims from coming forward. Administrators want to be seen as taking an aggressive stance toward sexual assault offenders. But that’s not always the most effective method. Take this example: Regardless of the victim’s preference, many schools (including Columbia and Barnard) have begun requiring faculty and staff to report all sexual assaults to the administration. While this will empower some victims to file formal complaints, many more who are unsure of what they want will inevitably keep their stories to themselves, afraid to share something they might one day regret. Another popular move by college administrators is to make expulsion the standard punishment for all perpetrators found guilty of sexual assault. Again, this will alienate a lot of victims. Many want to figure out how they’re feeling but are not quite sure how and if they want to take formal action.
How can we create an environment that encourages the most victims to open up about what happened to them? These are two suggestions I have for the task force.
First, it should require colleges to control what kind of things witnesses are allowed to talk about in a sexual assault hearing. Today, most colleges and universities allow witnesses to discuss character evidence. That means they’re allowed to talk about the character of the people involved in the case. They can say, “He’s a great guy—he would never do something like this,” or, “She get’s drunk a lot—this isn’t the first time something like this has happened.” This kind of character evidence would generally not be allowed in a state or federal court. But because a university disciplinary board is not required to follow the same “rules of evidence” used in a court, character evidence is permitted and often (whether consciously or unconsciously) taken into consideration. If a victim knows witnesses might bring up issues like sexual history or drinking habits in front of a panel of staff and fellow students, she’ll be much less likely to pursue a hearing.