Adjunct Professor of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Stanford University
Faculty Affiliate at the Clayman Institute for Gender Research at Stanford University
Faculty Affiliate of the Women's Leadership Innovation Lab at Stanford University
Introductory Statement
Trauma robs the victim of a sense of power and control over her own life; therefore, the guiding principle of recovery is to restore power and control to the survivor. She must be the author and arbiter of her own recovery. . . . Many benevolent and well‐intentioned attempts to assist the survivor founder because this fundamental principle of empowerment is not observed. No intervention that takes power away from the survivor can possibly foster her recovery, no matter how much it appears to be in her immediate best interest. (Herman, 2002)
In the years between 2011 and the present time, many American universities rolled out policies compelling faculty report to college officials student disclosures of sexual violence. I became concerned about these compelled disclosure policies (often known as "mandatory reporting" or "required reporting" policies) from a research and policy perspective. I first published my concerns about compelled disclosure in a 2016 commentary in which I identified serious problems with compelled disclosure and I offered the core of an alternative policy that subsequently informed the University of Oregon's reporting policy adopted in 2017. If you read just one thing about this topic, I hope it is this:
A trauma-informed and research-based reporting policy is central to the goal of addressing sexual violence and is an essential step of institutional courage. For more on steps of institutional courage see Resources for Changemakers at the Center for Institutional Courage.
2022 Update: New Proposed Title IX Regulations from the Department of Education Regarding Mandatory Reporting - Comment Deadline was 12 September 2022
The comment period is now over but you can read about it:
8. Here is the AAUP Comment, recommending the University of Oregon policy as a model.
2022 Update: Links to the University of Oregon's Reporting Policy (aka Mandatory Supporting)
As of September 2017, most faculty and staff at the UO are not mandatory reporters but they are required to support and respect students who disclose an abuse experience. If you are seeking information about the UO's policy see:
Comment: Newins, A. R. (2019). Ethical considerations of compelled disclosure of sexual assault among college students: Comment on Holland, Cortina, and Freyd (2018). American Psychologist, 74(2), 248-249. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000363
The American Psychologist, the official peer-reviewed scholarly journal of the American Psychological Association, published in April 2018 our analysis of mandatory reporting policies.
2017 Updates: UO's new Reporting Policy Adopted (Mandatory Supporting Rather than Reporting)
On 12 April 2017 there was again unanimous support by the University of Oregon Senate for our new proposed reporting policy that does NOT make most employees mandatory reporters but instead obligates them to provide information, support the students and follow the wishes of the survivor/student. (Here is more about the task force that proposed the policy.) On 23 May, the university president signed this policy effective 15 September 2017. We also hope this policy can serve as a model for other campuses and organizations -- one in which we shift the focus from required reporting to required supporting. [See 2022 update above for current links to the policy.]
Video: Student-Directed Sexual Violence Reporting Policy Approved, 12 April 2017, University of Oregon Senate (16 mins) (also see Video of University of Oregon Senate, 18 May 2016 when mandatory reporting was rejected.)
Statements from Organizations Opposing Wide-Brush Mandatory Reporting Requirements
Letter on the UO's Mandatory Reporting Policy from the Survivors of Sexual Violence Support Caucus of the Graduate Teaching Fellows Federation (GTFF, AFT-3544) of the UO, 19 May 2016.
