Last week’s Senate meeting focused on a proposal to implement a restorative justice process for sexual misconduct cases. As was announced by Student Body President Lucas Binion prior to the start of the meeting, this discussion involves topics that some may find uncomfortable. Please be aware that the following article makes mention of sexual misconduct, and please take care of yourselves.
Honor Council Announces Restorative Justice Process Proposal
Several members from Honor Council were present at the meeting to announce their proposal for a restorative justice process that would deal with sexual misconduct cases. The language discussed at this meeting was published in last week’s Student Body Info email, and can also be accessed by emailing Lucas Binion. For those who are unfamiliar with the term, restorative justice is a philosophy in which someone who has violated policy or community norms acknowledges the harm they have caused and works with victims to make reparations.
In the context of Reed, a restorative justice process would be initiated when both parties to instance of sexual misconduct acknowledge and agree on what happened. As Honor Council member Eleanore Denegre explained, “the perpetrator is willing to accept responsibility and both parties involved voluntarily go into this process.” The person who committed the offense, the “recognizer,” would work with a SAPR-trained advocate to make a statement of harm and the survivor, the “requester,” would work with a different advocate to develop a list of reparations. Some examples of these reparations could be a public apology, an agreement to not take classes with the requester, or an agreement to not live in on-campus housing. The recognizer can then accept the reparations or reject them and close the restorative justice process. If the recognizer decides to reject the reparations, the case would then go to the Title IX Board.
Honor Council members emphasized that the restorative justice process does not hand down verdicts of guilt or innocence. Instead, it simply negotiates reparations after the facts of the case have been agreed upon. “The Coalition for Restorative Justice would not be a fact finding body whatsoever,” Honor Council member Frankie Breedlove said. The purpose of this process is to give more options and autonomy to the survivor. “It would be a way to pursue campus justice without doing it though an adversarial body,” Denegre explained. Honor Council also emphasized that this process is not designed for cases involving relationship abuse or dating violence. Assistant Dean of Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Rowan Frost elaborated, stating that when the requester and recognizer are involved in an abusive relationship, “there’s huge opportunity for manipulation.” Frost added that, “not all cases are appropriate for restorative justice.”
Some concerns about the logistics of the process were raised by community members. Student Kathryn Loucks asked whether the recognizer would be allowed bring a support person who made the requester uncomfortable. Denegre explained that supporters are only permitted in the room if they are invited by or approved by the requester. Concerns were also raised about reparations that could do harm to the recognizer or present a financial burden. For example, the reparation that requires someone to leave on-campus housing could potentially leave someone without a place to live. Honor Council responded that they are open to adding language about how to proceed if reparations will place “undue burden” upon the recognizer. Senator Alex Boyd asked if there was an option for requesters who didn’t want to be in the same room as the recognizer. Honor Council explained that there would be an option for requesters to have a prepared statement read on their behalf without being in the room. Community Safety Director Gary Granger pointed out that a recognizer signing a statement of harm is essentially a confessing to a crime, which could potentially be used against them in a court of law. Granger articulated that although he was in support of this process, “the devil’s in the details.”
Senator Eileen Vinton and student Evvy Archibald both brought up concerns about the restorative justice process extending the involvement of the survivor. “Going through the restorative justice process would necessitate a relationship [between the requester and the recognizer] that is not preexisting and that could be detrimental to [the requester],” Vinton said. Senator Alex Boyd echoed this sentiment, asking, “what if restorative justice causes survivors to reestablish contact with their abuser?”
Members of Senate and Honor Council expressed an interest in discussing this topic further. Honor Council announced that a forum would be held to discuss the current language, and that they would return to Senate meetings in the future to announce and discuss their progress on the document.
Committee Reports
CUS Liaison Eileen Vinton is currently working with CUS to ensure that students’ legal names show in email and on Moodle. Vice President Josh Cox announced the semester agenda for the Critical Race and Ethnic Studies Subcommittee (CRES). Its current project is to present a proposal for a race and ethnic studies major to the Committee on Academic Planning and Policy (CAPP).
Senator Dylan Holmes announced the release of the murals application, which is available online. Senator Miranda Mishan announced the Committee on Diversity’s plan to create an online form for biased incident reporting. Students will be able to file complaints about incidents with professors which they believe to be the result of bias or discrimination. However, this is not a formal investigation process.
Treasurer and SAPR Liaison Audrey Dannar advertised for a student art show on March 22 and 23 which explores the topic of sexual assault prevention and awareness. Dannar is also working on a consent banner for the Student Union, and is looking for input on the wording and design of the banner. Senator and Community Safety Liaison Elliotte Garling gave an update on the process of getting students involved in CSO hiring. Community Safety is working with the human resources office to try and implement this process for the next cycle of hiring. Garling also announced that CSOs will receive training concerning gender and pronouns. Additionally, CSOs will add their preferred pronouns to their nametags.
Senator and Facilities Liaison Asher Groh announced that Facilities Services is currently working convert more bathrooms to be gender-neutral. Senator Alex Boyd announced that the Student Committee for Academic Policy and Planning (SCAPP) is working to create a faculty and staff grievance process. This is different than the Committee on Diversity’s biased incident reporting, in that it would act as a formal complaint with a follow-up investigation process. Boyd also brought up the intersectional nature of CSO gender diversity training, and added that CSOs could additionally benefit from identity-based training that focuses on race. Senator Kate Hilts gave several planning updates from Renn Fayre Committee, including the new addition of a CSO outpost inside of Kaul. This would make it so that CSOs don’t have to walk all the way back to 28 West between calls, and it would also easier for students to contact them.
What’s Up With the Smoking Policy?
Former President Ashlin Hatch asked about the status of the Smoking Policy. President Binion responded that Senate is waiting for the faculty to vote on it. Hatch asked where to find the recommendations and a copy of the policy language, and Binion responded that he will include these documents in the next Student Body Info.
Is SCAPP a “Senate thing”?
Student Saul Chasin brought up concerns about whether SCAPP is becoming too exclusive. Although any student may be appointed to SCAPP, at least three senators must sit on the committee of five voting members. Chasin asked Senate for “thoughts on how to step back and let students who aren’t on Senate have more of a voice.” Hatch had a different opinion, explaining that she is in favor of having at least three senators on SCAPP as many senators run on a platform of curricular change and SCAPP is the only avenue through which they are able to make that change. “It’s unfortunate right now that there is a tension between the senators and the non-senators,” Hatch said. Senator Boyd echoed Hatch’s comment, but acknowledged Chasin’s feelings of feeling left out of the process. “Before I was a senator I got frustrated by feeling locked out by authority or bureaucracy,” Boyd said.