Two legal consultants from Pennsylvania spoke at MU on Tuesday, conducting two open forums where faculty could voice their questions and concerns about the university’s new Title IX policies.
Gina Maisto Smith and Leslie Gomez are Title IX attorneys with expertise in the concepts and legislation shaping university Title IX policies and partners from the Philadelphia law firm of Pepper Hamilton, LLP.
The attorneys said they hoped to provide insight about what really happens nationally, how other schools navigate these issues and what are some pros and cons of different models.
The two women reminded faculty that there is no “one size fits all approach” to deal with Title IX. They said the concept is very complex.
In February, the UM System Board of Curators adopted new rules and regulations for pursuing sexual harassment and discrimination cases against faculty or staff members.
Craig Roberts, MU Faculty Council Chairman, said these new policies created anxiety among the faculty. He said apprehensions within the investigation phase and the hearing panel phase were two of the faculties main concerns. Roberts said faculty members felt that there should be an increase in attorney representation in the hearing panels.
Gomez and Smith told faculty that MU should focus on increasing attorney representation during the investigation rather than during the hearing panel stage of the process.
According to MU’s current policy, “a group of at least 10 administrators or staff appointed by the chancellor or designee to serve as hearing panelist in the formal resolution process.”
Smith gave faculty members insight on how to conduct successful hearing panels.
“Investigation and hearing processes are most effective when they balance fair and impartial process and opportunities to be heard with trauma informed practices,” Smith said.
Smith noted a specific section on MU’s Title IX written policy during the forum. She said the phrase “mandated reporter” does a disservice to the community.
According to the MU Title IX Office website, “A mandated reporter is any employee of the University who becomes aware of an act of sexual harassment (including sexual misconduct) or behavior which could be characterized as sexual harassment, when perpetrated against a faculty, staff, student or visitor of the University.”
Smith said the use of this phrase does not aptly convey what happened in this act or behavior when information is shared centrally. She said “mandatory reporter” often connotes with what people know about mandatory reporting and child abuse.
“The goal of sharing information centrally is to be able to empower a victim's claim and to ensure they have access to all resources, all options and to connect them to a process where we can respect agency and autonomy,” Smith said. “We leave a mixed perception of what centralized reporting is about if we call it ‘mandatory reporter’.”
The attorneys also advised MU to review their Title IX policy annually.
“An annual review enables us to stay up to speed with current laws, guidance and information that we learn on our campuses through our experiences,” Smith said. “That’s just a way to stay in touch with what’s happening in our community and in touch with what our responsibilities are.”
Smith explained how she and Gomez focus on more than just legal procedures when handling Title IX cases.
“Our approach to this is multidimensional in that it is not only the law which many focus on, but taking the law and piecing that together with informed practices about how these issues effect people and then making sure that our policies speak to our values in incorporating those two elements,” Smith said.
