October 2024

Dear Friends of Courage,

In this issue of the Courage Brief we present two new articles about institutional betrayal and institutional courage. 

The first piece, by Aubrie Patterson, MS, and Laura Noll, PhD, titled "Reconsidering Religious Trauma: The Critical Need for Betrayal-Related Research in Religious Communities," explores the intersection of sexual abuse, religious settings, and psychological well-being. Funded by the Center for Institutional Courage, their research aims to explore the ways religious institutions can cause unique layers of trauma and institutional betrayal, including "spiritual violence." 

The second article, "What Do Leaders Need to Do the Right Thing?" by Monica J. Casper, PhD, reflects on her experiences in higher education and the complexities of addressing institutional betrayal. Dr. Casper emphasizes the need for systemic change and courageous leadership, sharing initiatives from her time at San Diego State University that prioritized survivor support and cultural change to create more humane environments.

Courage’s impact was also evident in a news report about the recently released Zero Tolerance Code of Conduct published by the European Commission of the EU. Marcela Linková, PhD, a researcher involved in the creation of the code, is quoted in the article commenting that implementing the code will require “institutional courage and leadership”.

The Center for Institutional Courage was also a topic of conversation in a recently aired “Fireside Chat” in which I participated and that is now available for viewing.

Selected additional articles by and about members of our team are listed at the end of this issue of the Courage Brief. 

Thank you for your engagement,

Jennifer Freyd
Founder and President, Center for Institutional Courage

What Do Leaders
Need to Do the Right Thing?

By Monica J. Casper, Ph.D.
Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences and professor of sociology at Seattle University

I work in higher education, which means that I have had ample opportunity to witness institutional betrayal as a graduate student, faculty member, department head, and leader. I have also had the opportunity to work to mitigate harm, sometimes successfully and sometimes not. Creating more humane learning, teaching, and working environments is one of the many reasons I became a dean.

As a sociologist keenly interested in organizations, I understand that institutions are bounded spaces made up of people, practices, policies, histories, technologies, archives, and buildings that exist in broader social contexts. As embodied by people, institutions represent and reproduce hierarchies and inequities. Making change means not just working at the individual level, but also working at the structural or systemic level.

Alas, structural change can be slow - sometimes glacially so. It takes effort and time to move institutions. Yet courageous leadership matters. The right leader in the right place at the right time can make all the difference between the continuation of harm and the disruption of harmful practices and behaviors. This is one of the reasons I have been thinking about the question: What do leaders need to do the right thing?

Unfortunately, in higher education and elsewhere - especially recently - there is little room for error. Whether we are talking about students, faculty, or administrators, one small misstep can lead to cancellation or even termination. (Though tenure tends to protect those who have it, as does privilege of all sorts, including racial and gender privilege.) The current political context is such that we expect everyone around us to get things right all of the time, or else.

If we want to see systemic change that makes a difference, we need to grant our leaders an ounce of grace. Of course, sometimes grace is neither warranted nor deserved. A university president or dean who commits sexual harassment or assault? Immediate dismissal. Ditto the university leader who makes racist or misogynist comments. They have no business being in positions of leadership.

However, I have found that many administrators are deeply committed people who have chosen leadership to make things better for the people around them. They want to support faculty and students. They want to ensure staff are fairly compensated. They want to create cultures of care. They just do not always know how to do so or are not given the space to reflect on their own actions and do better. They may also be beholden to regents and trustees who are more focused on the bottom line.

Let me offer an example of courageous leadership. At San Diego State University, where I worked prior to my current role, I was both dean and then special assistant to the president on gender-based violence. That role came about because, after the off-campus sexual assault of a young woman in our community by student athletes, President Adela de la Torre wanted to do something bold on our campus to make change.

In addition to appointing me as special assistant, we also created a Blue Ribbon Task Force on Gender-Based Violence. We joined the NASEM Action Collaborative on Preventing Sexual Harassment in Higher Education. And we began to have hard conversations across campus about how to improve our campus climate, prevent sexual assault, and better support survivors. All of this unfolded in a context in which the California State University System was being tasked with improving its Title IX practices.

There is still so much work to be done, both at SDSU and at my new institution - and indeed, at every institution of higher education in the country. However, courageous leadership, such as that shown by President de la Torre, can move the bar, and it can signal to those within the institution and beyond that change is not only possible, but necessary.

Dr. Monica J. Casper is Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences and professor of sociology at Seattle University. A scholar of gender, race, health, violence, and trauma, she is the author of numerous books and articles, most recently Babylost: Racism, Survival, and the Quiet Politics of Infant Mortality, from A to Z. With Rebecca G. Martínez, she is the co-editor of Betrayal U: The Politics of Belonging in Higher Education, scheduled for publication in 2025.

Join Us and Support Courage

With your help, Courage can conduct groundbreaking scientific research and share what we learn with the world. Together, we can make institutional courage a reality. Courage is a 501(c)(3) exempt organization, and your donation is deductible within the limits set by the IRS.

Image courtesy of Canva.com AI

Reconsidering Religious Trauma: The Critical Need for Betrayal-Related Research in Religious Communities

By Aubrie Patterson, MS, and Laura Noll, PhD
Northern Arizona University, Department of Psychological Sciences

For many, religious and spiritual practices are interwoven with psychological well-being and meaning making. But what happens when representatives of religious institutions sexually abuse their members, fail to protect them, or even condone perpetrators of sexual violence? Responding to the need for systematic research in this understudied area, we have begun conducting a mixed-methods study, funded by the Center for Institutional Courage, on religious trauma and betrayals related to sexual abuse in religious communities.

Our research builds on recent work describing the unique harms of trauma in religious settings. In 2022, Heidi Ellis and colleagues developed a synthesized definition of religious abuse/trauma which includes three core elements: misuse of power (e.g., using hierarchical power or God for control and manipulation), psychological harm (e.g., damage to sense of self, disoriented worldview), and spiritual harm (e.g., harm to spirituality or faith; damaged sense of meaning, ethics, or purpose). Victims of sexual misconduct in religious settings, such as by a clergy member, may be experiencing what researcher Fiona Gardner refers to as a “double betrayal”: both interpersonal betrayal and institutional betrayal. A double betrayal might also be felt when a trusted family member or friend commits sexual abuse and the church does nothing to prevent it from happening again. What’s more, there may be another felt layer to sexual abuse in religious settings that goes beyond impacts of sexual or psychological abuse. According to Ellis et al.’s systematic review, when people are sexually abused within a religion, they often describe mental health impacts that they directly connect to religious trauma. This includes not just psychological and physical health symptoms, but also the effects of what has also been called “spiritual violence:” their connection to a higher power and spirituality is wrapped up in, and damaged by, the abuse.

This research is important and timely for multiple reasons. First, there is limited data on sexual violence in religious settings, and survivors’ experiences deserve to be shared. Second, religious institutions tend to be insulated environments with pronounced power hierarchies, which, as researchers of institutional betrayal, flags for us a need for accountability and transparency. Carly Smith and Jennifer Freyd illustrated this in 2014 when they wrote about how religious figures are often seen as directly connected to God, a type of prestige that is “associated with an uneven distribution of power” which might increase the challenge with holding them accountable. Finally, news stories continue to emerge (such as this, for example) detailing reports of sexual abuse in religions that may have previously flown under the radar.  

As researchers respond to the need to support survivors and shed light on religious betrayal and trauma, we will need to work together to explore the kinds of changes that may be most impactful. What are the best ways to prevent sexual abuse in religious communities, and how can we empower religions that aim to become more institutionally courageous when abuse is reported? We hope that this research will help to answer these critical questions.