June 2023 Courage in Action

Sexual harassment and assault – and the related institutional betrayal – can be found in every type of institution. One type that I know particularly well is sexual harassment in science. I know about this as a researcher, a member of national advisory committees, a mentor, a consultant to lawyers on legal cases, and from personal experience.

Fortunately there has been improvement over the past half century, but clearly there is so much work remaining. I shared my perspective on how far we’ve come and how institutional courage is a key solution moving forward in an important new article, Sexual Harassment Still Pervades Science, published this month in Scientific American.

A few excerpts from the Scientific American article with my quotes are here.  

First, on the topic of institutional betrayal:

But a bigger part of the problem is how universities and academic institutions approach sexual harassment—as a liability they need to protect themselves from, rather than something that they should be protecting their communities from. Trainings reflect that, says Jennifer Freyd, an expert on the psychology of sexual violence and founder of the Center for Institutional Courage.

“They’re not looking at the big picture of doing the right thing, and often not actually even reducing lawsuits,” she told us. She says this approach doesn’t work, and instead creates “a culture of distrust” for victims at the institution.

On the problem with mandatory reporting which so often produces institutional betrayal:

Another issue is mandatory reporting—where university policy dictates that an employee must report suspected harassment, even if the victim doesn’t want the report. . . . Freyd calls this a double victimization; the harasser or the person committing the assault is trying to take power away from their victim, and any policy forcing someone to report harassment when so much is at stake robs that victim of their agency.

On effective reporting policies and responses to disclosure:

According to Freyd, the proper response from anyone the victim tells about the experience includes: avoiding blame or invalidating the victim’s experience, attentive listening, and allowing the victim to remain in control of decision-making. Reporting should be confidential and outside a power structure that could negatively affect the victim, and the victim should have control over how the information she has provided is used.

On the harm of institutional betrayal:

When Havell reported a recent incident to her employer, she submitted a statement and affidavits that backed up her allegations from four witnesses who were colleagues. And just as Freyd described, Havell’s report caused her further trauma when university leadership gave that information to her harasser…

And finally, on the promise of policies and laws that nurture institutional courage:

The recently passed bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act is another legislative win. . . [T]he act appropriates $32.5 million to combat sex-based harassment in STEM. . .Freyd is “very pleased” about this progress: “It is based on evidence and forward looking, with a heavy emphasis on investing in research on sexual harassment—research that will pay off in the years ahead…. It is significant to see the reality of sexual harassment in STEM recognized in this way.”

Jennifer Joy Freyd, PhD
Founder and President
Center for Institutional Courage