Mandatory Reporting of Sexual Misconduct at College: A Critical Perspective

TLDR

Many universities now require faculty and other responsible employees to report suspected sexual misconduct to Title IX administrators, aiming to ensure accountability and compliance with Title IX, though critics claim the policies are overreaching, paternalistic, and discriminatory. The article aims to critically examine Title IX’s mandatory reporting policies by delineating their intended goals and unintended consequences. The authors draw on prior research on sexual victimization and their own exploratory data on gender‑based college harassment to analyze three overlapping issues: ambiguous definitions, reporting risks, and faculty’s role in disclosure. They conclude by proposing alternative strategies for achieving Title IX’s objectives.

Abstract

Many universities and colleges now require all "responsible employees," including faculty, to report known or suspected sexual misconduct to designated Title IX administrators. The intention of these mandatory reporting policies is to ensure institutional accountability and compliance with Title IX's prohibition against sexual and gender-based discrimination. Yet, critics argue that such policies are overreaching, paternalistic and, arguably, discriminatory. Drawing from prior research on sexual victimization and original exploratory data on gender-based college harassment, this article provides a critical perspective that delineates both the intended goals and unintended consequences of Title IX's mandatory reporting policies, specifically focusing on three overlapping issues: ambiguous definitions, reporting risks, and faculty's role in disclosure. We conclude by proposing alternative strategies for achieving Title IX's objectives.