The Office of Student Conduct and Conflict Resolution Services made three changes to the sexual assault policy this semester to make the policy more understandable and useful to students.
The new additions to the code are:
A definition for “coercion” was added.
Sexual history cannot be used as evidence against a student in cases of sexual misconduct.
The complainant, who files the complaint, can appeal in cases involving sexual misconduct.
The changes were based on recommendations made by AU’s Sexual Assault Working Group and the U.S. Department of Education.
The Sexual Assault Policy has been undergoing changes for the past three years.
Rosie McSweeney, director of Student Conduct and Conflict Resolution, said these changes were necessary.
“[In the] Student Conduct Code, the word ‘coercion’ was used several times,” McSweeney said. “For clarification purposes, a definition is necessary.”
The policy now states that any sexual act involving coercion will be considered sexual assault, which the Student Code of Conduct now defines as “to force one to act based on fear of harm to self or others,” through, “pressure, threats, emotional intimidation or the use of physical force.”
Vice President of Campus Life Gail Hanson said this clarification has helped students better understand and follow the code.
“Students really benefit from having a term like that defined so they know what we mean,” Hanson said.
The second change was another clarification for what was already in practice, that sexual history, of both the accused and the victim, cannot be used as evidence against a student in cases of sexual assault.
“It’s always been the case that the sexual history of the complainant has not been admissible, but it’s now formally stated,” Hanson said.
The changes in the policy’s definition of coercion and the use of one’s sexual history in cases of sexual misconduct were made as a result of recommendations made by AU’s Sexual Assault Working Group.
The group was created to research best practices for dealing with issues of sexual misconduct and to make recommendations for improvement.
“I had actually put together a group back in January 2009,” Vice President of Campus Life and Dean of Students Rob Hradsky said.
The group consisted of AU faculty, staff, students and representatives from the Office of Campus Life, Women’s Initiative and other groups.
“The group focused on policy, education and advocacy,” Hradsky said. “[The changes] were additional areas where they thought we could use some more clarity,” he said.
The change in appeal cases was made as a result of a “Dear Colleague Letter” issued by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights. The letter advises universities on how to interpret existing law, Hanson said.
McSweeney said the reactions she received to the sexual assault policy changes had all been positive, but there had not been many.
Hradsky agreed.
“I think that’s partly because they’re so new and we haven’t really had an opportunity to use them in practice this semester,” Hradsky said.
The Sexual Assault Working Group will continue to look at ways to improve the policy and educate the AU community on issues concerning sexual misconduct, Hradsky said.
