T-shirts speaking out against sexual assault hang on a clothesline at Prince George’s County Hospital in 2011. The University Senate approved a sexual assault education mandate for all members of the university community
Students who hoped to see officials vote on a bill mandating sexual assault education on the campus this spring may have to wait several more months before such a policy is taken up.
The measure has been attached to the Sexual Harassment Task Force’s comprehensive review of the university’s sexual harassment policies. Rather than being reviewed and voted on separately, the education mandate cannot be voted on until the rest of the review is finished — work that has been held up because of legal consultants’ delays working for the task force.
While the task force considered pushing the mandate ahead for its own consideration, it decided against doing so because all of the recommendations depend upon each other, said chairwoman Cynthia Hale, and addressing issues separately would not be as effective as a collective review.
The proposal was first introduced in January when the University Senate Executive Committee quickly charged the task force to study requiring all students to receive presentations from the university’s Sexual Assault Response and Prevention Program. The task force initially planned to review the proposal — which was authored by senior Lauren Redding, who is also a Diamondback editor — and, if it saw fit, the group would submit a bill for a full senate vote. Although student activists are disappointed by the delay, it’s driven by the task force’s extensive research and recommendation process, Hale said.
“Certainly an important piece is that final report from our consultants has been delayed,” said Hale, adding the task force now expects to receive the consultants’ input late this month.
Also impactful, she said, was that this was “such an important and such a sensitive issue” for the campus community that the senate should not rush its review and vote. The task force will continue its review over the summer, Hale said, meaning the mandate and other recommendations will not be voted on until the fall when the senate will have “plenty of time to discuss and deliberate.”
But Redding said the education mandate should not be lumped together with a larger review, especially because the senate could have voted on the proposal on its own as soon as this month. She pointed to student support — a change.org petition for the mandate had about 1,350 signatures as of last night.
“It’s frustrating because we’ve been working really hard,” Redding said. “We have a petition circulating, we got tons of signatures, there’s so much student support for this and all of a sudden, we’re told it might not happen until next year.”
The university can’t afford to wait to implement sexual assault education, supporters said, as sexual assault is a widespread problem on college campuses. SARPP saw 76 new cases during the 2011-12 academic year, including more than 40 sexual assault or rape victims. Additionally, supporters point to the fact that one in five women will be sexually assaulted during her collegiate career, according to several studies.
“We did so much of the legwork that it seems like a no-brainer,” Redding said. “It seems really silly for our proposal to get held up because they’re working on something else.”
The review process shows the task force is demonstrating a “commitment to doing a thorough job on all matters,” said Martha Nell Smith, senate chairwoman.
A faster progression on the issue would make a difference, however, as it would give the university more time to plan and organize such an extensive policy, said Stephanie Rivero, SARPP’s assistant director.
“The sooner we get the mandate passed, the more able the SARPP office will be able to prepare for it so we can work out the kinks and get things moving,” she said, adding it could be a “long process” for the program to adjust to a larger workload.
And many people need help now, said Ryan Heisinger, Student Government Association academic affairs chairman.
“What we don’t realize is that these are human beings who are being affected, and they’re people that we know, people that we may live with, and it’s something that we can effect change on,” he said.
However, pushing ahead the proposal could be a disservice to the university, Hale said, given the complexities and breadth of the issue.
“What we don’t want to do is do something quickly that won’t be effective,” she said. “We’re trying to really think through all the ramifications, delivering this education in a way that’s actually going to have an impact on students.”
