Julia McCarthy: UC support for sexual assault survivors needs to be solidified

This post was updated on Aug. 11 at 10:17 a.m.

This past spring, “#WhyIDidntReport” became a trending hashtag on twitter.

Survivors of sexual assault flooded the social media website with accounts of why they didn’t report their assaults. “#WhyIDidntReport Because I was 15 and had been drinking and wearing revealing clothes and I knew no one would be on my side #rapeculture,” is one prominent example from the movement.

Even Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), a prominent advocate for ending sexual assault tweeted “#WhyIDidntReport Thank you for sharing your stories. Your brave voices are so impt as we look at reforms in Congress to combat sexual assault.”

Though the issue of sexual assault is far-reaching, as is evident from the vast array of individuals involved in the #WhyIDidntReport movement, it also hits closer to home, and UCLA is often at the center of these discussions. UCLA has a shaky track record in handling reports sexual assault – just this June, a state audit took issue with the way UCLA, along with three other California universities, handles sexual assault training for faculty, staff and students.

But a recent bill, The Survivor Outreach and Support Campus Act released July 30, attempts to tackle this issue on the university level, providing survivors with a stronger support system to navigate the often difficult process of reporting sexual assault. The bill would allow the UC to improve its imperfect track record in regard to sexual assault, providing increased support for student survivors. But this can only happen if the proper measures are taken by the UC and the state to secure adequate funding and ensure that the bill is fully able to help student survivors.

The bill, introduced by Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Congresswoman Susan Davis (D-San Diego), designates an independent advocate to survivors of sexual assault for universities that receive federal funding. Because the advocate is independent, their allegiance is to the survivor and not to the university. If survivors request the advocate’s support in any capacity at a meeting with university officials concerning the survivor’s assault, be it legal, or simply moral support, the advocate’s attendance is required. This means that he or she would serve as a primary point of support and contact for survivors of sexual assault, regardless of whether or not the survivor chooses to report the crime.

The advocate would be responsible for making students aware of the services and resources the advocate’s office offers, such as legal advice, counseling and medical care.

The good news is that the University of California has already supported the bill. UC President Janet Napolitano wrote to Sen. Boxer lauding her for her commitment to tackling the issue of sexual assault.

But the UC can’t stop at simply expressing support for the bill.

With sexual assault on college campuses becoming a bigger and bigger topic of discussion, a common theme is seen at many universities: administrations botching how they handle accusations of sexual assault.

When students don’t trust their own university’s administration, their ability to report an incident of sexual assault is compromised. Going through the emotionally taxing experience of reporting sexual assault is already hard enough, and it’s not made any easier when students feel as if their university’s priority is to keep its reputation, or the reputation of its star athletes, clean.

Often, in cases where high profile college athletes are accused of sexual assault, the athletes have more access to support and legal guidance. The advocate could level the playing field.

Anne Hedgepeth, government relations manager of the American Association of University Women, an organization that endorsed the bill, said that the advocate can serve as an important first point of contact for students.

She said that though students may know their schools have resources available, it’s not always clear who they should go to when they’re confronted with a situation where they actually need to use the resources.

Though Napolitano can voice her support for legislation such as Boxer’s recent bill, it will take action and serious investment to change the culture currently surrounding the issue of sexual assault on UC campuses.

This includes addressing the issue of securing adequate funding from the state, a necessary step to successfully helping survivors. Providing large institutions like UCLA with more financial support for the advocates involves cooperation from both UC administration officials and government officials.

“Without funding, the office may not be able to do all of its responsibilities to the best of its abilities and for the most benefit of survivors. Hopefully, the [advocate’s] office will actually be a physical office with either multiple Advocates or office staff to help the Advocate,” Savannah Badalich, founder of 7000 in Solidarity and Student Wellness commissioner wrote in an email statement.

The advocates are bestowed with the large responsibility of ensuring that each individual who seeks out their help receives sufficient counseling, access to legal advice, and medical care, among other services.

If the advocate is overworked and stretched too thin, the entire purpose of the bill, in expanding and building a greater network of support for survivors of sexual assault, would be defeated.

This starts with the UC working with the state to ensure each campus receives the financial support needed. Though state funding is hard to come by these days for the UC, we can’t skimp when addressing the issue of sexual assault prevention and protection.

Words of support are one thing, action is another. The UC needs to follow through with its commitment beyond surface level stances of support to truly succeed in being a leader of ending sexual assault on college campuses.