Sexual violence has been a topic of considerable community
and legislative focus for several decades now; however, only recently has its
existence on college campuses elicited such attention. Indeed, in 2015 the
Obama administration’s Education Department took aggressive steps to address
concerns about sexual violence and harassment on campuses, spurring the
enactment of “Yes Means Yes” laws in such states as New York,
California, and Michigan (with many post-secondary institutions adopting
similar standards without legislative mandate).
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.
The original intent of this legislation was to ensure that girls
and women in educational arenas would be protected from discrimination and
other differential treatment based on gender. An early focus of Title IX was
discrimination in athletics, in which female students rarely received the same
opportunities to participate and benefit; however, the recent focus of Title IX
has been incidents of sexual violence on campus.
As someone who has worked in sexual violence prevention for
nearly 32 years, I have been privy to the case descriptions of thousands of
incidents of abuse, harassment, and other forms of sexual misconduct; however,
almost all within the traditional criminal justice domain. When stories of
sexual violence on college and university campuses started to become the
subject of high profile media focus, I had to admit that I had never considered
those environments as in need of specific
attention. It’s not that I somehow didn’t think it was happening on campuses (I
had known women who had been sexually assaulted when I was in school), I just
assumed that it was being managed like sexual violence in any other
environment. Turns out I was wrong, and I needed to do something about that.
Through my work with Circles of Support and Accountability,
I’ve attended a variety of restorative justice (RJ) conferences and workshops
and met many RJ theorists and practitioners, including David Karp of the Project on Restorative Justice
at Skidmore College in Saratoga Springs, NY. Together with Co-Chair Kaaren Williamsen of Swarthmore College in Pennsylvania,
David has pulled together a large group concerned academics and practitioners
from around the US and Canada – all of whom are concerned about how academic
institutions are responding to sexual violence. This month, that group – known
as Campus PRISM – released a comprehensive report promoting restorative initiatives for
sexual misconduct (PRISM) on college campuses (authored principally by Karp, Julie Shackford-Bradley, myself, and Williamsen). According to
the report:
Restorative
justice encompasses a range of processes, programs, practices, and policies as
well as a philosophical perspective that offers a new approach to addressing
the problem of sexual and gender-biased misconduct on college campuses.
It is our belief that restorative interventions can be used
for community building to establish appropriate standards of sexual conduct on
campus, in addition to reducing fear and counteracting the hostile climate
sometimes characterized as “rape culture.” While we do not believe that
restorative approaches are appropriate for all instances, we are deeply
invested in reducing sexual and gender-based violence by exploring how such
approaches could foster healing and provide for greater accountability. To that
end:
Campus PRISM promotes restorative justice
processes that…
-
Encourage true accountability through a
collaborative rather than adversarial process;
-
Reduce risk of reoffending and provide
greater reassurance of safety to survivors/harmed parties and the community;
-
Meet survivors’/harmed parties’ needs
for safety, support, and justice; and
-
Create meaningful forums for the
examination of hostile campus climates and the development of
community-building interventions.
Goals of the Campus PRISM Project:
- Create space for scholars and
practitioners to explore the use of RJ for campus sexual and gender-based
misconduct (which includes sexual harassment, sexual assault, and other forms
of gender-based misconduct) as an alternative or complement to current practices.
-
Consider the potential and challenges
of RJ in light of the national concern about campus sexual assault.
-
Apply lessons learned from the use of
RJ in criminal justice sex offenses, e.g. Circles of Support and
Accountability, restorative conferencing, and other trauma-informed practices.
-
Gather and disseminate knowledge about
RJ practice and research.
-
Explore the potential for multi-campus
RJ pilots.
A
fundamental aspect of Campus PRISM is the belief that restorative justice –
including various circle practices – can further a prevention agenda through
the intersection of information sharing, education, reflection, and community
building. Specific to the issue at hand, circle practices encourage people with
various perspectives to sit together in a circle and explore issues related to
sexuality. One such circle practice suggested in the PRISM report is the
aforementioned Circles of Support and Accountability (CoSA), an RJ-informed
initiative in the greater sexual offender risk management domain in which perpetrators
have been paired with 4-6 community volunteers who support them in their efforts
to remain offense-free and accountable to the community. According to the PRISM
report, CoSA could provide opportunities for reintegration following an event
of sexual violence on campus:
After an incident has been officially resolved, even when a
student has been found in violation and suspended, a restorative approach takes
into account the long-lasting impact on the individuals involved and the wider
community. Although some students who violate campus sexual and gender-based
misconduct policies will require criminal prosecution and/or expulsion from the
institution, others will remain enrolled or be allowed to reenter after some
period of suspension. Implementation of a restorative approach would provide
opportunities for student offenders who return to address their issues in a
meaningful and socially accountable manner while providing for enhanced
monitoring and service provision.
At
present, many colleges and universities are grappling with new mandates and
responsibilities handed down by the Office for Civil Rights (OCR), the Department of
Education’s division responsible for Title IX enforcement. The consideration of
RJ options may not have been a particular area of focus as yet; nonetheless,
the report suggests that the following list of next steps could be considered
by campuses interested in pursuing a restorative approach:
-
Adopt a restorative lens
-
Create a restorative justice study group/steering committee
-
Develop capacity in RJ through training and facilitation
-
Review and update policies to include restorative justice
-
Promote community awareness
-
Engage in restorative justice research
-
Pilot a restorative approach
In
conclusion, the members of Campus PRISM firmly believe that a restorative
justice approach to sexual and gender-based violence offers hopeful
opportunities to address the concerns of victims, offenders, and the broader
educational community. We believe that simple adherence to compliance standards
will not be enough to address issues related to healing, student development,
and community growth; nor will simple compliance sufficiently promote new
perspectives such as those resultant from a comprehensive implementation of
restorative principles with attention to prevention, response, and
reintegration. Understandably, broad application of RJ principles and practices
will take time; however, as capacity grows, campuses can aspire to and reach a
goal of true community transformation.
Robin
J. Wilson, Ph.D., ABPP
Wilson
Psychological Services LLC, Sarasota, FL
McMaster
University, Hamilton, ON
No comments:
Post a Comment