Articles Fail To Understand Harassment Policy

Several articles in recent issues of The Crimson suggest a widespread misunderstanding of Harvard's policy for responding to allegations of sexual harassment. As a member of this academic community, I am concerned that such misunderstandings could lead to a deterioration in our intellectual and educational environment.

As Associate Dean for Affirmative Action and a former Chair of the Standing Committee on the Status on Women, I want to remind the community of the procedures we follow. Because it is inappropriate for me to discuss specific rumors or allegations, I review the procedures in general and discuss the principles that underlie our approach.

Sexual harassment is always offensive, but it is especially insidious in an educational institution where such conduct inevitably has a chilling effect on intellectual life. The Faculty of Arts and Sciences is determinded to prevent harassment and to respond forcefully when it occurs.

During the past decade, Harvard has developed an excellent set of procedures for combating sexual harassment. These procedures enable the University to respond effectively to individual complaints while respecting the right of the accused to due process.

In most instances, concerns about conduct are dealt with informally. For example, a student whose instructor's behavior makes him or her feel uncomfortable can privately seek the advice of a hearing officer. In such cases, the situation is often resolved when the student, after consultation with a hearing officer, address the instructor in person or in writing about the problematic behavior. Misunderstandings can thus be resolved without escalation to formal charges, with advantages to both parties.

However, in some instances, the troubling behavior is so egregious or persistent that a formal complaint and inquiry become necessary. Such inquiries are pursued vigorously. However, Harvard's procedures ensure that special care is taken to maintain a presumption of innocence, to assure that the accused has the benefit of due process and to respect the rights to privacy of all individuals.

A formal charge of sexual harassment requires a deliberate and thorough written statement signed by the complainant. The accused is then given an opportunity to respond in writing to the written charge. These two written statements from the basis of the investigation. Thus, whenever a formal charge is brought, the accused party is always informed of the particulars of the charge and the identity of the complainant. In all other respects, confidentiality is strictly maintained. Without that assurance, claims would rarely, if ever, be brought forward.

When a student brings a complaint against a faculty member, special care must be taken to avoid harm to the student. This need is particularly great for graduate students because of the apprenticeship nature of graduate studies. Graduate students depend on their advisers not only while completing their degrees, but also for obtaining positions and research funding long into the future. Their careers are at stake in any confrontation with an adviser. The confidentiality that is central to our processes is thus necessary not only to preserve the presumption of innocence for the accused, but also to protect the complainant, who also is concerned about his or her personal and professional reputation.

Spreading unsubstantiated allegations and rumors of sexual harassment--whether in person or through the press--compromises the presumption of innocence that is basic to the investigation and threatens the whole process.

Any speculation that a particular individual has brought a formal sexual harassment charge cannot help but have a chilling effect on the University's efforts to support those in need of assistance.

Our message to students regarding sexual harassment is to "tell someone." Public speculation about who may have told will send the message that the prudent course of action is to tell no one.

Harvard's procedures for addressing sexual harassment have proven quite effective. They rely upon a presumption of fairness and confidentiality.

Every student has a right not to be harassed. Every member of this academic community has a responsibility to work toward a harassment-free environment; this responsibility includes respecting individuals' rights to privacy as well as the presumption of innocence; requires respect for confidentiality in processes for dealing with harassment. Barbara J. Grosz,   Gordon McKay Professor of Computer Science