Data from the U.S. Department of Justice revealed that sexual assault cases at 10 surveyed New England universities and colleges, including Tufts, have hardly ever resulted in severe sanctions for perpetrators.
Only four of the 240 alleged assaults reported between 2003 and 2008 at the schools surveyed resulted in expulsions, although the Justice Department numbers only cover the years in which the individual schools received grants and were therefore required to report sexual assault statistics.
At Tufts specifically, 13 cases were brought forward over this time period. Of these cases, one resulted in suspension, two were dismissed at the hearing stage because of a lack of evidence, and the remaining ten cases were settled through mediation or stay−away orders, according to Dean of Student Affairs Bruce Reitman.
Tufts and other institutions were required to report assault cases under a Justice Department grant program that sought to increase assistance for victimized females on campus. The university has, since 1999, received $1.3 million in grant funds, and The Boston Globe reported that none of the alleged perpetrators at Tufts have been issued reprimands or been sent for counseling.
Responding to the data, university officials like Reitman and Director of Public Relations Kim Thurler stressed that reports such as The Boston Globe's article ignore other measures Tufts uses to handle sexual assault allegations.
Many individuals interviewed by the Daily indicated that unclear procedures for handling sexual assault cases at Tufts could explain the low number of sexual assault hearings and the lenient disciplinary consequences for perpetrators.
According to senior Alexandra Flanagan, president of the Students Active for Ending Rape (SAFER), confusion surrounding the sexual assault policy exacerbates the problem of underreporting.
"The need for change is made glaringly clear from the Tufts [sexual assault] policy," Flanagan said. "After hearing stories from survivors, we realized the real need for a policy that is clear, comprehensive and unbiased. Survivors need to know what to do step by step." Current Policy
There are currently four options available to victims and perpetrators of sexual assault, Reitman explained.
The victim can choose to pursue a university hearing, which could lead to expulsion or suspension if sufficient evidence is available; seek a campus stay−away order, which does not have any disciplinary consequences for the perpetrator but prevents all forms of contact; or engage in mediation, in which both parties try to reach an outcome.
The final option is for the accused party to withdraw from Tufts, which is the most common way for the perpetrator to leave the university, according to Reitman. However, a student who withdraws with a pending sexual assault hearing will have a permanent record of the disciplinary charges on his transcript.
Reitman added that victims are not restricted to one option. For instance, if the desired disciplinary action is not reached through mediation, the victim still has the option of seeking a hearing. Criticisms
Mediation, however, is a controversial means of resolving sexual assault cases and is not supported by the Justice Department and the U.S. Department of Education.
Colby Bruno, an attorney with the Victim Rights Law Center in Boston, explained that using mediation ignores the victim's fear, the most basic psychological effect of sexual assault.
"Mediation fails to take into account the power and control dynamic that is always involved with a rape or assault," Bruno said. "The reality is that the victim has nothing to gain by mediation with her perpetrator, so it is an already imbalanced methodology."
Bruno added that although Tufts makes available to victims the option of a campus stay−away order, it is not a sanction on the perpetrator — stay−away orders do not go on a disciplinary record — and should in fact be automatically granted to all survivors.
"A stay−away order is the least amount of protection that a school should give to a victim that has complained of a sexual assault or rape," he said. "I would not categorize it as a disciplinary measure, but as a safety measure."
Shalini Vivek, another attorney with the Victim Rights Law Center, disagrees with Tufts' current judicial process that prevents attorneys from accompanying students to university hearings or mediation sessions in sexual assault cases. Sexual assault victims, Vivek said, need more support when facing the perpetrator.
This policy, Flanagan said, is an example of how alleged sexual assault cases are handled differently from other types of disciplinary infractions.
"We think it isn't really fair that the procedure is the same for plagiarism as it is for sexual assault," she said.
Beyond the need for a new sexual assault policy, Bruno and Vivek both believe that the greater issue is the policy's implementation, especially the question of university officials' impartiality.
"Any person in the administration who makes decisions that affect the case also makes decisions about liability to the university, which is not objective," Bruno said. Change
Reitman emphasized that the sexual assault policy has been undergoing review and discussions about how best to revise it are underway. SAFER has been working closely with the administration to amend the sexual assault policy.
The Tufts Community Union (TCU) Senate is also currently working on a resolution concerning changes to the policy. Freshman Wyatt Cadley, the senator on the Administration and Policy Committee who is working on the resolution, said that it will highlight the need to clarify the judicial process and codify a list of resources available for victims. He hopes that a new policy will be in place by the next academic year.
"[The resolution] expresses our support for ideas put forth by Health Service and SAFER … and emphasize[s] that we need a new sexual assault policy quickly," he said. "It will be unacceptable if there is not a new policy by the time we come back for the new semester."
Retiman noted that one aspect of the sexual assault policy that may change is the mediation option.
Flanagan highlighted differentiating the sexual assault judicial process from the process for dealing with other disciplinary infractions as one of the main changes SAFER is pushing for.
She also, along with Cadley, emphasized the need for clearer standards for university officials handling sexual assault cases.
"[The policy] leaves a lot of discretion to the administration," Cadley said. "We need a policy that clearly outlines to the student body what is going to happen in these instances and hold[s] administrators accountable to this policy."
University officials noted that prior to this ongoing review of the sexual assault policy, efforts had already been taken to improve the handling of sexual assaults on campus and increase awareness about the policy.
According to Senior Director of Health and Wellness Service Michelle Bowdler, the grant that Tufts received from the Justice Department between 1999 and 2007 has been used to increase campus education and implement measures to prevent sexual assault.
Bowdler explained that the grant funded programs such as police trainings, educational efforts and policy revision. She cited the increase in reporting of sexual assaults over this time period as an indicator of its success on campus.
"The fact that our numbers went up is an indication that students feel more comfortable with reporting," Bowdler said.
Director of Health Education Ian Wong said that Tufts over the past year held two community forums on the sexual assault policy, and last semester's forum led to the creation of a clearer sexual assault Web site for the Tufts community.
