BYU Honor Code Amnesty: Policy Changes re: Sexual Assault

Some good common sense changes. While it seems that these could have come out faster (say, overnight), they are at least steps in the right direction, and almost entirely proper. The only area that still gives me a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach is the amnesty portion that still has some weasly language. It sounds as though victims are still going to be subject to expulsion for HCO violations once the investigation of the crime is completed–it’s got some tricky language in there anyway. IOW, if you want to assault a BYU student and get away with it, get the student to violate an HCO rule, and you can do whatever you want to them. They probably won’t report it because being kicked out means they’ll lose their credits.

This was LookingHard’s comment from the other thread:

From: “Kevin J Worthen” <univ-comm@byu.edu>

Date: Oct 26, 2016 9:43 AM

Subject: Advisory Council Study of Sexual Assault Complete

Dear Students, Staff and Faculty,

Today we are announcing that the Advisory Council on Campus Response to Sexual Assault has completed its study and that the President’s Council has agreed with all the recommendations in the Advisory Council’s report. We are releasing that report today, and I wanted you to be the first to have access to it. I encourage you to read the Advisory Council’s full report, as well as its recommendations.

As the Advisory Council notes, sexual assault is an abhorrent offense that violates sacred doctrines – such as moral agency, the sanctity of the body and the sacred nature of marriage and sexual intimacy – that are central to the restored gospel of Jesus Christ. Sexual assault cannot and will not be tolerated at BYU.

Our top priority is the safety and well-being of our students. This is particularly true for those who have been the victims of sexual assault. They have been through a devastating experience, and they are looking for our help and support. We have an obligation not only to provide that support, both emotional and spiritual, but also to create an environment where sexual assault is eliminated.

The Advisory Council, led by Vice President Janet S. Scharman, shares that commitment. Its report represents hundreds upon hundreds of hours of work since the council was formed in mid-May. It is thoughtful, thorough, candid and extremely helpful. I am deeply grateful to Vice President Scharman, Vice President Sandra Rogers, Dean Ben Ogles and Dr. Julie Valentine for their commitment to helping us find solutions to this complex and challenging issue.

After reviewing the report and recommendations, the President’s Council has determined to accept all of the 23 recommendations. There are several that we will begin to implement immediately, including the following:

Create a new, full-time Title IX coordinator position to replace the existing part-time Title IX coordinator position.

Create a victim advocate / confidential advisor position.

Create a new, physical space to house the Title IX Office in a location separate from the Honor Code Office.

Ensure that, unless the health or safety of others is at risk, the Title IX Office does not share information with the Honor Code Office about the complainant without the complainant’s consent.

Adopt an amnesty clause.

Because the recommendation regarding amnesty involves a change in policy, the exact contents of this clause need to be reviewed by the Student, Faculty and Administrative Advisory Councils before it becomes official policy. In the meantime, we will operate under the amnesty guidelines recommended in the report.

More information about the report and what this means for BYU is contained at https://news.byu.edu/title-ix” class=”bbcode_url”>https://news.byu.edu/title-ix.

We do not have all the answers to this problem, which is a nationwide issue affecting all colleges and universities. But this report provides an excellent framework on which to build. Because of the Advisory Council’s extremely valuable work, we are in a much stronger position to help those who have suffered the traumatic effects of sexual assault and to prevent such events in the future. Heightened awareness of the issue by each one of us is itself a step in the right direction. I encourage us all to aid in this important endeavor.

Kevin J Worthen

Ensure that, unless the health or safety of others is at risk, the Title IX Office does not share information with the Honor Code Office about the complainant without the complainant’s consent.

1) When my health and safety are at risk I go to the police, not an honor code office. What health and safety concerns would merit going to the honor code office? To expel a dangerous person from school? If they are truly a danger let the police deal with them, then worry about whether or not they can remain enrolled. Also, a dangerous person could be expelled without releasing a list of their victims.

2) What added benefit does the complainant receive by giving consent to have their name turned over to the honor code office?

We do not have all the answers to this problem, which is a nationwide issue affecting all colleges and universities.

[img]http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/762/009/74d.jpg[/img]

names of victims or witnesses reporting sexual misconduct will not be shared by the Title IX Office with the Honor Code Office, unless at the request and written permission of the reporting student or if the health or safety of others is at risk.

Weasel wording; note that they don’t say the HCO won’t act on the information, or will offer any leniency at all if it happens to get there some other way…like a deputy with a big mouth, or any other source outside the Title IX office.

NightSC, the wording is clear:

Nobody (victim or witnesses) will be disciplined for reporting.

The situation where sharing a victim’s name with the Honor Code office is allowed is standard practice in situations where confirmation/testimony is needed to discipline an offender and/or accomplices. If a victim wants to speak with the Honor Code office about the situation (to help protect others from future incidences), they are allowed to do so – but there still will be no discipline toward the victim.

The quoted excerpt has to be read in context of the full recommendations. In isolation, it could imply what it doesn’t mean in full context.

Nobody (victim or witnesses) will be disciplined for reporting.

Where does it say specifically that? I’ve dealt with politicians too many times to settle for “well, you’re right in that it doesn’t quite specify that, but the meaning should be clear.” Tell that to the guy who ends up spending his next 2-20 mortgage payments to get a judge to say “yes, that’s obviously what was intended.” Sort of a hollow victory when you spend the next several years in debt to get there.

Correlation didn’t approve revelation since it contradicted history

Nobody (victim or witnesses) will be disciplined for reporting.

Where does it say specifically that?

In the sections I quoted earlier in the thread, it says that multiple times. It is one of the central points of the entire new policy. They won’t be disciplined for reporting – or for being a victim – or for being a witness – even for secondary things that happen at or near the time of the incident. It is spelled out uncategorically and clearly and emphatically.