Reflections on Sexual Assault Awareness Month

This April is Sexual Assault Awareness Month. The National Sexual Violence Resource Center (NSVRC) has taken the lead to promote dialogue pertaining to sexual misconduct throughout this month for the cause of preventing sexual assaults. Prior to engaging in such dialogue, it is important to understand the history and current context that make up the pillars of how sexual misconduct has been combated on college campuses.

There is a pressing question to ask: how did campuses become adjudicators of sexual assault in competition with police? In 1972, President Nixon signed into law Title IXof the Education Amendments, which was designed to prohibit sex-based discrimination in higher education: “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.” Nevertheless, it took many years for this amendment to embody the protections it provides today against sexual misconduct: initially, it only governed federally funded colleges' athletic policies; it was not until several years later that student to student conduct was governed by Title IX too.Shortly after Title IX’s inception, the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) was tasked with overseeing its implementation, and since 2001 it has taken the necessary steps to provide schools with compliance training and students with much needed resources to combat sexual assault and sexual harassment on their campuses.

Over 40 years after Title IX’s passage, the push to end sexual misconduct has come a long way. However, the movement faces severe setbacks due to recent events. In April of 2011, OCR sent a nationwide letter out to colleges and universities, often referred to as the Dear Colleague Letter (DCL). In short, the DCL mandated the broadening of the disciplinary processes of sexual misconduct cases on college and university campuses. Additionally, DCL’s regulations has also broadened the dialogue of sexual assault to include victims of administrative malpractice.

Designed to enhance the safety of those who suffer from sexual violence on these campuses, the implementation of the DCL has led instead to the creation of a whole new controversy. In schools’ efforts to remain in compliance with OCR’s new guidelines under the DCL, many overlooked and neglected the need to provide constitutionally or contractually protected procedural safeguards for all parties involved in a sexual assault case. As a result, within just the past five years, over 100 lawsuits have been filed in state and federal courts from students whose due process and other protected rights were allegedly violated in the procedures of their campuses’ sexual assault disciplinary proceedings. This number is also far lower than the actual amount of administrative due process violations, as many such cases do not get filed due to the cost and time necessary for the pursuance of such legal action.

By precipitating a trend of administrative malpractice that has led to the publicizing of these personal cases in public courts, victims of sexual violence now have to contend with the possibility that their traumatic experiences are made public. Movements in prevention of sexual assaults, while being motivated by good intentions, should prioritize the privacy and interests of victims of sexual assault. The decision to report a sexual assault should be made with the knowledge that one won't suffer more for having pursued justice; all too often that is not the case. 

During this Sexual Assault Awareness Month, it is important to review the current situation regarding Tufts' progress in compliance with Title IX, to inform the members of Tufts community about the consequences of violation and to mobilize them to join in the effort of combating sexual assaults on campus.