AS HARVARD University opens its doors to the student body for classes, they also welcome a new sexual assault policy implemented over the summer. This new policy mandates that any "alleged victim of sexual assault" -- from unwanted touching to rape -- must "produce corroborating evidence" before the University will launch an investigation. Phrased in this manner, the implication is that a student would have to provide evidence before a presiding board would even deign to hear an accusation. Harvard's new policy, rather than being well thought out and sensitive, effectively perpetuates the deeply rooted culture of both silence and shame that surrounds the issue of sexual assault.
First of all, the language within this policy is immensely hurtful and damaging psychologically, leading any person educated in issues of sexual assault to believe that there was a lack of expert consultation initiated before the execution of this policy. In fact, the ad hoc committee selected to determine ways to delineate "un-provable" cases from "real" cases consisted of the Dean of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, a professor of Latin and a professor of Middle Eastern studies. The terminology of "alleged victim" immediately claims disbelief and skepticism toward any person having possibly experienced sexual assault.
Even further, anyone who has been through an experience with assault should be referred to as a "survivor," not a "victim" -- the term survivor empowers the person.
Such specifications may seem unimportant to a person not having dealt with such serious issues, but even this menial change of words could make a complete difference in the mind of someone who has just been raped.
What may be most vicious in this clause, however, is the ambiguity of the term "corroborating evidence."
The definition of corroborate is "to strengthen or support with other evidence; to make more certain." At an institution of such stature, there's nothing needed beyond the substantial and potent claim that a person has been sexually assaulted. Yet this is so, and there are no definitions or specifications as to what exactly "corroborating evidence" is. There also are no provisions as to whose responsibility it will be to decide what type of evidence suffices this mandate.
Another, deeper issue is the lack of concern for a true survivor of an attempt or actual sexual assault. Due to the lack of explanation and clear definition in the policy, a lot of ambiguities are raised by the policy. Harvard was unavailable to comment on this serious issue or clarify any of these questions. Hopefully, the new policy will not mean that a student who has just recently been assaulted will be forced before a university panel to present their corroborating evidence. If a female has just been raped by a male after a party, she may be required to give an embarrassing and scarring testimony before a board of middle-aged men in suits in order to prove that she has been violated.
Because most evidence in cases involving any type of sexual assault are time-sensitive, does this mean that a student must act immediately or never be able to see justice served by their own university community? So many of these questions only scratch the surface as to the greater implications that Harvard has not clarified in this horrific policy.
Understandably, Harvard is trying its best to make all students feel safe and remain fair and unbiased when it comes to sexual assault, which, in a legal context, contains more gray area than black and white. Still, they are not doing a good enough job. If Harvard wants to protect its students, they should never hinder an investigation of sexual assault from taking place. What should be examined carefully is any official accusation or disciplinary action taken against a student before a full and complete investigation has taken place. Fairness to all students is definitely a priority, but the schematics of this policy are detrimental to every student at that university.
The federal government reports that one in four college women will have been the targets of rape or attempted rape since the age of 14. Eighty-five percent of college rapes are committed by a person the survivor knows, but only 5 percent of attempted or completed rapes will actually be reported. Harvard, in efforts to decrease false accusations of sexual assault, has inadvertently hindered the rights and level of comfort for actual survivors to come forward with their stories. Their efforts have been extremely misconstrued, and very unfortunately, the people who are going to suffer from this policy are those who least deserve any added pressure from their college institution -- the survivors of sexual assault.
(Amey Adkins' column normally appears Tuesdays in The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at
aadkins@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | YesterdayThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | 6 days agoEvery student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
