Open Letter to President Barron, Pennsylvania State University

This letter was posted to Medium by End Rape On Campus on behalf of Jeanne Meyer, who also wrote to University of Illinois, Loyola University Chicago, University of Connecticut, and Washington State University. You can read these letters in the responses to this post, and as linked above.

Update: Read Pennsylvania State University’s response here.

Via Email (president@psu.edu)

September 22, 2017

President Barron
The Pennsylvania State University
201 Old Main
University Park, PA 16802

Dear President Barron,

I am writing to you as the aunt of a graduate student at Penn State and as a rape survivor.

I was raped as a college my sophomore year at the University of Illinois in 1990 when a stranger entered my room late one night while I was asleep. I went to the hospital immediately after and a rape kit was gathered. Later, I met with the police and did a police sketch. But I was clear with the police from the beginning: I knew that I was not strong enough to vigorously search for and try to prosecute my rapist. I wanted the authorities to have the information and the evidence as I thought that it could possibly help someone else, but I was too scared to do anything else. Why was I scared? I was scared that I would be attacked again. Attacked by the police, the lawyers, or the school community. Attacked because I didn’t scream, because I had been drinking earlier that evening, or because of my sexual history. So, I buried the pain and quietly moved on with my life.

Finally, in 2012, my rapist was caught, brought to trial and sentenced to 90 years in prison for raping another woman. Investigators believe he was a serial rapist.

All I can think of is: What if in 1990 I was not so scared? What if I knew that I could go to the University for help? What if I knew that I would not be attacked? What if I knew that I would be believed? What if I knew I was not alone? Could I have saved just one woman from being attacked by that same man?

Obviously, I will never know the answer to that question, but I do know that the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter was the first effective step towards holding universities and rapists accountable and now I AM strong enough to fight. I will not allow the protections that finally have been provided to sexual assault survivors on college campuses to be ripped away without a fight.

Can I count on you to help me in this fight? I read a letter yesterday to the President of Swarthmore by Jodie Goodman and Hope Brinn that perfectly summarizes what I am feeling and what I am requesting, so I am going to copy excerpts of it below, and I hope that Penn State will make the commitment to uphold the protections afforded under the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter to me, to my niece, and to all of the other students at Penn State. I believe you know that this is the right thing to do.

I look forward to your prompt response to this very serious matter.

Sincerely,
Jeanne Meyer
Napa, CA 94558
jeannemeyer111@yahoo.com

“We are in a time of crisis. In just a few short months, we have watched our government strip away the rights and privileges of some of the most marginalized groups in our country, including immigrants, refugees, transgender individuals, and people of color. Today, we watched the US government withdraw key principles on adequately protecting students from gender-based violence.

At George Mason University, Secretary of Education Betsy Devos, spoke on students’ right to learn in an environment free of sex based discrimination. While she assessed the reality of the epidemic of sexual violence on campus as “lamentable”, her speech today focused on victims of “a lack of due process” and the “failed system” established by the Obama administration. She portrayed the guidelines as overly cumbersome and confusing for campus administrators, and told the stories of instances where improper enforcement led to unfair outcomes for several students accused of misconduct. She spoke of schools losing funding because of the “shaming” by a “weaponized” Department of Education. She did not explain that these cases are few and far between, or that the accused most frequently suffer no consequences for their actions.

“The era of rule by letter is over,” she declared, invoking the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter which she intends to do away with. At no point did she explain that it is that letter that provides clear guidelines for schools to approach both complainants and respondents. She claims that a few cases of improper implementation of the letter’s guidelines require an entire “New Way”, which will require students to seek resources outside their schools, where the federal government does not specifically require investigation into all cases of misconduct or remedies in the case of sex or race based discrimination.

We are angry and disappointed that the Trump Administration refuses to require that institutions use fair, equitable, and frankly common-sense measures in response to sexual misconduct. But we call on [this University] to reaffirm its commitment to these processes that allow students of every gender to fully access their education.

Students should be able to turn towards their colleges and universities for resources and support when they face sexual violence. But in a system where victims of violence expect campus adjudications to be increasingly traumatizing, many opt not to report their experiences to their colleges. Perpetrators of violence therefore remain on campuses, posing a continuous threat to the rest of the student body. Current protections and best practices related to student sexual misconduct are each crucial to the safety and health of the entire student body.

We ask [this University] to maintain the follow key components of the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter clarifications of Title IX:

Preponderance of evidence standard
The preponderance of evidence standard is the standard employed by judges and juries in all civil (non-criminal) trials in the American judicial system. Commonly explained as demonstrating that it is more likely than not that an event took place, a preponderance of evidence standard affirms that both students’ educations are equally important by setting both the complainant and the respondent on an equal playing field. It is appropriate to apply this standard in college hearings on sexual violence because no school’s process judges the criminal culpability of students or assigns criminal punishments. Some claim that a higher burden of proof should be considered when the punishment is as severe as expulsion from college, but fail to differentiate sexual assault adjudications from other similar campus processes or civil court proceedings.

Ongoing Title IX rights and responsibilities training for all students, faculty, and staff
Even well-intentioned actors can be socialized to believe myths about rape. The Education Department’s civil rights chief, Candice Jackson, recently had to retract the damaging and empirically false statement that most cases of assault “fall into the category of ‘we were both drunk, we broke up, and six months later I found myself under a Title IX investigation because she just decided that our last sleeping together was not quite right.” Attitudes like this among administrators and civil rights advocates isolate survivors of violence and discourage them from seeking help.

Furthermore, students deserve education about their rights to an environment free from discrimination. The extensive resources Swarthmore offers to survivors of sexual violence mean very little if survivors do not know they are available. Swarthmore must continue to require ongoing programming for all enrolled students.

Explicit policy of non-retaliation
This policy must exist and be rigorously enforced in order to ensure that complainants are safe throughout the reporting process and to prevent a chilling effect on reporting more broadly.

A prompt and equitable investigation and appeals process that lasts no more than approximately 60 days
Dragging the process out over months or years of a student’s short time in college detracts from their ability to engage in their education.

A prompt notification of all outcomes of disciplinary proceedings to complainants

Amnesty policy for complainants under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol

Use of interim remedies for the complainant
Remedies can include housing change, no-contact order, providing an escort across campus, providing medical, psychological, and academic support, or class section change so that a survivor’s education is minimally impacted by the violence they suffered.

These protections allow survivors of sexual violence to complete their education during a time of intense trauma. If Title IX guidelines are rolled back, more students will be forced to choose between their health and safety and their education in an adversarial and traumatic relationship with administrators, whose job is to foster a safe learning environment.

If the federal government will not enforce these standards, it is incumbent upon educators [to] take up that mantle.”