JCVVS e-newsletter reviews offer a brief synopsis
of
research and programs relevant to violence and victim
studies. Brevity does not allow for comprehensive
analysis, rather key points and observations for further
review and consideration. Reviews are provided by
persons affiliated by the JCVVS and do not
necessarily reflect the position of the JCVVS or the
affiliate universities.
Author: Potter, R.H., Krider, J.E., McMahon, P.M.
Title: Examining Elements of Campus Sexual
Assault Policies: Is Deterrence or Health Promotion
Favored?
Source: Violence Against Women, Vol. 6, 12, pp.
1345-1362. (2000)
Reviewed by: Thomas Underwood
Federally funded postsecondary educational
institutions are required to develop sexual assault
prevention and response policies. The authors of this
article suggest two distinct approaches in addressing
violence: public health and criminal justice. A public
health approach is more focused on prevention,
typically through awareness and education activities.
This includes information and services for risk
reduction, promoting responsible dating and sexual
behavior (predominantly directed toward males), and
greater awareness of and empathy toward victims. A
criminal justice approach is focused on deterrence,
that is, to deter someone from committing an offense
due to fear of punishment. In the case of campus
sexual assault, this means clear articulation of the
rule, potential for apprehension, and consequences.
To find out to what extent colleges and universities
adopt a public health or a criminal justice approach in
sexual assault policies, 100 postsecondary
accredited institutions were randomly selected for
telephone survey. The final sample of 78 consisted of
39 public and 39 private institutions. The researchers
found that more than half of the institutions focused on
deterrence through sanctions, either university-based
or community-based. About a third of the schools
employed strategies of risk-reduction or target
hardening. Only a handful of four-year institutions (no
two year institutions) utilized prevention efforts that
focused on male responsibility or victim empathy. The
authors note the limits of the research in that various
university departments that might have a role in policy
development and information dissemination were not
contacted. Further, staff and students were not
contacted to assess level of awareness about issues
and resources.
The philosophical debate between prevention and
deterrence, and the related policies that frame
societal responses toward offenders and victims,
which takes place in the broader society holds true at
our colleges and universities. While clearly articulated
statements of zero tolerance and a range of sanctions
are important and necessary, these are incomplete
without policies and supported strategies that
emphasize prevention. The lack of prevention
education at colleges and universities is particularly
ironic considering our knowledge about victimization
risks of young adults and the educational mission of
colleges and universities. As is true for the broader
society, colleges and universities response to
campus sexual violence, as well as all forms of
victimization, should be embrace both a public health
and a criminal justice approach.
