Mandatory Reporting (MR) in Higher Education

Abstract

Mandatory reporting (MR) policies concerning sexual assault victimization now extend to institutions of higher education. The laws are new and thus controversial since relatively little investigation into their impact has occurred. Additionally, since the laws require disclosure to police, at times, even in instances where victims object, opponents have expressed concerns about potential unintended effects, such as diminished victim autonomy. Perhaps, though, the most glaring question involves how college students perceive the policies. Because students are the focus of the laws, this investigation evaluates student opinion about MR, including approval for the policy, the likelihood of personally reporting under MR, perceptions of faculty compliance, and expected outcomes of MR laws. Findings suggest overwhelming support for MR, substantial likelihood of personally reporting assault under the law, and strong belief in faculty compliance. Not least, although students recognize both the positive and negative possibilities of the law, higher percentages believed in the law's potential benefits (e.g., increase university accountability). Implications for research and policy are discussed.

“A victim/survivor needs agency”: Sexual assault survivors’ perceptions of university mandatory reporting policies

“…The small body of existing research has primarily focused on students' knowledge and perceptions of mandatory reporting in general, not among survivors. For instance, a study by Mancini et al (2016) found that students held mixed feelings about the efficacy of mandatory reporting, with some imagining positive outcomes (e.g., survivors receive services) and others imagining negative outcomes (e.g., survivors are stripped of autonomy). A recent doctoral dissertation (Amin, 2019) found that while many students favored mandatory reporting policies, other students indicated that mandatory reporting would hinder reporting.…”

The Role of Trust in Student Perceptions of University Sexual Assault Policies and Services

“…While there exists literature on barriers to sexual assault disclosure as well as on students' perceptions of sexual assault on campus, research on students' perceptions, understandings, and knowledge of campus sexual assault policies and/or services (Garcia et al, 2012;Mancini et al, 2016;Nasta et al, 2005;Streng & Kamimura, 2017), particularly as it relates to sexual violence on Canadian campuses, is limited (Council of Ontario Universities, 2020; Quinlan et al, 2016). Students' opinions of campus adjudication of sexual assault, and students' likelihood of reporting sexual assault to campus authorities, also remains largely unexplored (Amar et al, 2014;Orchowski et al, 2009;Taylor & Gassner, 2010).…”

Framed as (Un)Victims of Sexual Violence: An Intersectional Model

“…Similarly, Title IX regulations in higher education provide another example of well-meaning and important policy that may encourage (un)victimization of Black women and girls. Specifically, Title IX provisions for mandated reporting of sexual violence may take agency away from victims and place it in the hands of authorities and institutional investigative offices, who, in compliance with the law, may inadvertently exacerbate problems for victims/survivors (Mancini et al, 2016). The result may be the perpetuation of the (un)victim cycle, as the interests of victims can conflict with institutional priorities.…”