BYU-I Sexual Assault: Ecclesiastical Endorsement Loophole

[provoman]

8 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Attempting to control bishops would be an inappropriate top down act, which cannot be justified in a horizontal Church.  BYU is an arm of the Church, and the Brethren are its Board of Trustees.  That has nothing to do with independent bishops throughout the world, who are going to make their own judgments if they are told of any wayward ward members.  Retaliation is going to happen.  No way to avoid it.  If you drop acid, smoke a joint, or get stoned some other way, that just may get back to the bishop.  However, I do not know what Church policy is on this matter.

Bishops endorsement is an Honor Code requirement, suspension from BYU for an endorsement revoked to due activity "at or near" the time of the sexual assault sure seems to violate the amnesty clause.

[bsjkki]

16 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

This is really interesting point. I have heard of bishops consulting SPs in cases of major transgression (like adultery) but I don't think its in any way standard protocol for a word of wisdom violation.

This also happened with someone I know. The Bishop said he consulted with the Stake President so this person felt their was no where to turn when things went badly with the Bishop. There was somewhere to turn and that was "out" of Mormonism completely. Bishops are are not trained as behavioral scientists and have no clue how to judge temperament effectively. Especially when dealing with the youth (children) and rape/assault victims. They judge someone not knowing what they are doing or who/what they are really dealing with. Campus Bishops have less time and do not know the kids in their ward. They haven't known their family or watched them grow up. Inherent biases are going to be a huge problem in campus wards because of this. The only good ones are those who are humble enough to completely rely on the Lord. The best Bishops are the humble Bishops. 

 

[bsjkki]

After reading the article, I tend to agree that the power Bishops have over students and adults is a really difficult dynamic. Your Bishop is supposed to be a spiritual advisor but he is also your judge and jury. It is problematic. 

“Your bishop can kick you out of school, and if you’re a professor, your bishop can fire you. As a university administrator, to give up that much power is … deeply problematic and at the very least should have some kind of an appeal procedure. ...

LDS bishops are lay clergy who are unpaid and aren’t required to attend professional seminaries, Austin noted. A lack of training or expertise can be particularly hazardous in cases of sexual assault, where criminal investigations may be pending, victims may be traumatized and predators may be looking for leverage over victims, he said.

“Ecclesiastical endorsements give an enormous amount of power to an untrained leader who may or may not be understanding about things,” Austin said. “Ecclesiastical endorsements, for both faculty and students … open up the door to a fairly horrific level of possible blackmail.”

 

Edited August 8, 2018 by bsjkki

[CV75]

1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

In a sense you're right. The attacker schmuck can always go and tattle to the bishop that her shorts were too short or she was drinking alcohol, and she'll have to deal with that. But the bishop shouldn't have the power to override BYU policy by expelling the student from college. Fine, let the bishop clumsily push her towards repentance if you think that's useful. But don't give the bishop the authority to end the student's college career. That power is merely a BYU policy. It can be changed/fixed.

So you don't think there's a role for Title IX in helping to ensure women have the resources they need and in helping to make campus' a safe place?

A Bishop does have the keys for the temporal affairs of his ward, both in counseling and accessing (and limiting) Church resources for members’ temporal pursuits. I think this principle does extend to the Church universities. I don’t think the likelihood for abuse (in this case, retaliation in a home or student ward) in different settings affects this underlying principle one way or another.

I think it is interesting that those with authority in other faiths are invited to act as a gatekeeper without those keys, but I suppose the Brethren can “deputize” anyone to act under “assignment,” especially when it is administrative in nature. In this way the non-LDS pastors can also expel someone from college if a parent or significant other finds a way to make the case.

[Duncan]

Just now, bsjkki said:

After reading the article, I tend to agree that the power Bishops have over students and adults in a really difficult dynamic. Your Bishop is supposed to be a spiritual advisor but he is also your judge and jury. It is problematic. 

“Your bishop can kick you out of school, and if you’re a professor, your bishop can fire you. As a university administrator, to give up that much power is … deeply problematic and at the very least should have some kind of an appeal procedure. ...

LDS bishops are lay clergy who are unpaid and aren’t required to attend professional seminaries, Austin noted. A lack of training or expertise can be particularly hazardous in cases of sexual assault, where criminal investigations may be pending, victims may be traumatized and predators may be looking for leverage over victims, he said.

“Ecclesiastical endorsements give an enormous amount of power to an untrained leader who may or may not be understanding about things,” Austin said. “Ecclesiastical endorsements, for both faculty and students … open up the door to a fairly horrific level of possible blackmail.”

 

just as an aside how would a Bishop be able to fire you if you're a prof.?

[bsjkki]

24 minutes ago, Duncan said:

just as an aside how would a Bishop be able to fire you if you're a prof.?

If a professor at BYU loses their endorsement, they are fired.

[Duncan]

Just now, bsjkki said:

If a professor at BYU loses their endorsement, they are fired.

okay, I was thinking more of "we saw you on surveillance you eating the jelly beans so you fired" so it's more of indirectly firing someone

[Okrahomer]

7 hours ago, Thinking said:

From the BYU-Idaho website.

There is at least one layer of appeals. Hopefully an assault victim (or any student) can appeal beyond the stake president, if necessary.

Students can also appeal for a waiver from the ecclesiastical endorsement:

”The main campus in Provo pointed to a statement from Daniel Woodruff, a Mormon church spokesman. “If a student within the Church Educational System wishes to dispute their ecclesiastical leader’s withdrawal of their endorsement, they can petition the institution's dean of students to remain in school.” Deadlines for doing so vary from campus to campus, Woodruff said.

“The final decision regarding a student's enrollment,” he added, “rests with each college or university.”

[bsjkki]

7 minutes ago, Okrahomer said:

Students can also appeal for a waiver from the ecclesiastical endorsement:

”The main campus in Provo pointed to a statement from Daniel Woodruff, a Mormon church spokesman. “If a student within the Church Educational System wishes to dispute their ecclesiastical leader’s withdrawal of their endorsement, they can petition the institution's dean of students to remain in school.” Deadlines for doing so vary from campus to campus, Woodruff said.

“The final decision regarding a student's enrollment,” he added, “rests with each college or university.”

I would love to see the statistics on how often an appeal is granted.

[Storm Rider]

4 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I hear what you're saying but it strikes me as condescending and patronizing. Do you believe this girl, and other victims who violated the honor code in other ways, need others to tell them how to be happy and restrict their educational choices for their own good? Should she thank the bishop for kicking her out of BYU-I?

And you don't think victims should be protected from retaliation? Do you believe that if they broke the honor code in some way, they deserve to be kicked out of school?

 

Gads, this is not so hard as you are making it.

1) this has nothing to do with trying to tell someone how to be happy. Haven't got a clue where that came from. Stop finding things I am not saying. Here is the issue I was addressing. School A requires all students to do X, Y, and Z to be a student. Student M chooses to attend the school and not follows X, Y, and Z.  Student M is invited to attend another university where there are no rules like X, Y, and Z.  This is hard, but in the long run Student M will live a more honest life and one that is keeping with her own moral standards.  She certainly will not be lying to others about following the standards at School A.

2)  Again, stop conflating crap that has nothing to do with the topic.  There are so very few universities in the USA that have an honor code.  There is a plethora of other universities that allow students to do whatever they want.  What I think is valuable and important is to allow students to attend any school and observe whatever rules they have to remain in good standing.  If a student does not observe the rules of the school it is obvious that school is not a viable choice for the student.

3)  A student should thank anyone that helps them find a school that more closely matches their personal objectives. 

[Storm Rider]

4 hours ago, Exiled said:

From the article, the young man clearly takes advantage of the young lady because she was drunk, sexually assaulting her.  He responds to her accusations by viewing himself in the third person, to distance himself from the conduct, claiming to her that he isn't himself when he is tired.  Then when notified by the Title XI office, he runs to his bishop in an attempt to muddy the consent waters because the young lady was drinking and obviously the intoxicated are more likely to consent, right?  Why hasn't he been criminally charged?  Even so, I agree that she should leave the school and hopefully she has family that won't hold it against her if she no longer believes.

If an individual abuses another person, regardless of gender, they should be punished.  

[Okrahomer]

Just now, bsjkki said:

I would love to see the statistics on how often an appeal is granted.

It would also be interesting to know how often students ask for the waiver and for what reasons.  Apparently the waiver option has been available for a while, but it was expanded in 2015. 

[provoman]

1 minute ago, Storm Rider said:

Gads, this is not so hard as you are making it.

1) this has nothing to do with trying to tell someone how to be happy. Haven't got a clue where that came from. Stop finding things I am not saying. Here is the issue I was addressing. School A requires all students to do X, Y, and Z to be a student. Student M chooses to attend the school and not follows X, Y, and Z.  Student M is invited to attend another university where there are no rules like X, Y, and Z.  This is hard, but in the long run Student M will live a more honest life and one that is keeping with her own moral standards.  She certainly will not be lying to others about following the standards at School A.

2)  Again, stop conflating crap that has nothing to do with the topic.  There are so very few universities in the USA that have an honor code.  There is a plethora of other universities that allow students to do whatever they want.  What I think is valuable and important is to allow students to attend any school and observe whatever rules they have to remain in good standing.  If a student does not observe the rules of the school it is obvious that school is not a viable choice for the student.

3)  A student should thank anyone that helps them find a school that more closely matches their personal objectives. 

I understand what you are presenting agree with. However, the instance of the OP isnt meerly a follow X Y Z rule or else, its a "If X happens due to Y and Z being engaged in, then discipline will not occur"

Otherwise, totally agree with. I think once a person realizes they would rather not live BYU code, that person should immediately begin the process to transfer.

[Kenngo1969]

5 hours ago, RevTestament said:

This reflects my thinking as well. They should encourage reporting those who rape. It is a sin, and is very hurtful to others. The school should be much more concerned about quelling such activity than whether someone had a beer. ...

I'm breaking my personal, informal vow to stay silent on this topic in favor of simply giving rep points to posts with which I agree (and likely will revert back to lurk mode once I've made this comment).  No, no man should take advantage of a woman who has consumed enough alcohol that she no longer is able to consent to whatever may happen thereafter (from where I sit, no "man" would).  But that's the whole point: In many of these cases, we're talking about oh, so much more than simply "a girl who has had a beer" (or two): While what (if anything) should happen to her status as a student of BYU because she violated her agreement to abstain from alcohol might be debatable, if you're so drunk that you can't consent, you've done a heckuva lot more than simply "have a beer."

[Amulek]

2 hours ago, bsjkki said:

This is quite an extreme case.

I know my example was just a hypothetical, but really? You don't think adultery happens among married couples at BYU? It may not be rampant, but it definitely happens. It happened to one of my best friends while we were still in school. That was the inspiration for my hypothetical. In the real life case, the guy she was cheating with never actually abused her (so far as I know), but it wouldn't be a stretch to imagine something like that happening. 

 

Quote

I don't think pulling an ecclisiatical endorsement should happen unless the behavior is repeated and the person is unwilling to change or work through the process with the Bishop. I would rather the sinners are able to stay in school and work with their Bishops to repent.

Same for perps? Or is it only victims who deserve to stay at BYU while they are "work[ing] through the process with the Bishop?"

 

[bsjkki]

7 minutes ago, Amulek said:

I know my example was just a hypothetical, but really? You don't think adultery happens among married couples at BYU? It may not be rampant, but it definitely happens. It happened to one of my best friends while we were still in school. That was the inspiration for my hypothetical. In the real life case, the guy she was cheating with never actually abused her (so far as I know), but it wouldn't be a stretch to imagine something like that happening. 

 

Same for perps? Or is it only victims who deserve to stay at BYU while they are "work[ing] through the process with the Bishop?"

 

Well, I did say this in my comment. "Of course, in the case of dangerous people, the school should kick them out but that is how it is at any school."

None of this is very easy to determine. We are having schools sued for kicking out accused perps without due process in kangaroo campus courts.  I think the accused deserves some due process too...it's all tricky.

[katherine the great]

1 hour ago, Storm Rider said:

If an individual abuses another person, regardless of gender, they should be punished.  

and they will never be reported in an environment that facilitates punishment of the victim as well.

[katherine the great]

52 minutes ago, Amulek said:

I know my example was just a hypothetical, but really? You don't think adultery happens among married couples at BYU? It may not be rampant, but it definitely happens. It happened to one of my best friends while we were still in school. That was the inspiration for my hypothetical. In the real life case, the guy she was cheating with never actually abused her (so far as I know), but it wouldn't be a stretch to imagine something like that happening. 

 

Same for perps? Or is it only victims who deserve to stay at BYU while they are "work[ing] through the process with the Bishop?"

 

In a sexual assault case? Are you joking? No. The assailant should not be allowed to stay at the school.

[bsjkki]

25 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

In a sexual assault case? Are you joking? No. The assailant should not be allowed to stay at the school.

I agree with you but I do struggle with the due process question. The case in the OP was clear cut...he admitted it and he should go. Should anyone accused of sexual assault have due process or just get kicked out immediately?  

[Bernard Gui]

10 hours ago, Exiled said:

is merely drinking alcohol enough to get an eclesiastical endorsement pulled? 

Yes, along with any other behaviors you sign a promise to avoid in order to have the privilege of attending  a church school. 

Edited August 9, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[Amulek]

25 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

In a sexual assault case? Are you joking? No. The assailant should not be allowed to stay at the school.

Groping is considered sexual assault.

So, say you have a guy who mistakenly thinks a girl has been flirting with him, and he - in a misguided attempt to gain her further attention / affection - pinches her buttocks. 

With no express or implied consent that's going to be sexual harassment / sexual assault. 

Is it your opinion that he should be kicked out of school, or should he be allowed to remain and work through the repentance process with his ecclesiastical leaders?

 

[Avatar4321]

Is it really so difficult to just live the gospel?

[sunstoned]

10 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I don't know that bishops have a hierarchy for how they would apply the breaking of commandments to an ecclesiastical endorsement. At least I've never seen anything like that. So a bishop could really remove an endorsement for any reason he deemed necessary. A bishop, has extraordinary power to impact a student's education and future. Maybe bishops in university wards receive specific training on these kinds of things but I know it's not standard training for all bishops.

It is not just students.  This applies for employees also.  A bishop has supreme power.  He controls a person's education and professional job.

[katherine the great]

40 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

I agree with you but I do struggle with the due process question. The case in the OP was clear cut...he admitted it and he should go. Should anyone accused of sexual assault have due process or just get kicked out immediately?  

Of course they should have due process but the victim should be able to have a protective order in the interim. If they are in a class together, the professor should transfer the accused to a different section of the class until the arrest can be made (as well as later if he or she is bailed out.)

[katherine the great]

22 minutes ago, Amulek said:

Groping is considered sexual assault.

So, say you have a guy who mistakenly thinks a girl has been flirting with him, and he - in a misguided attempt to gain her further attention / affection - pinches her buttocks. 

With no express or implied consent that's going to be sexual harassment / sexual assault. 

Is it your opinion that he should be kicked out of school, or should he be allowed to remain and work through the repentance process with his ecclesiastical leaders?

 

Nah. For a playful pinch on the buttocks I would just report it to Human Resources and let them deal with it. It's clear that this went way beyond that. After groping her, he laid on top of her and tried to rip her clothes off. That's a sexual assault.