China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Professional Betrayal
Published in Paul Ian Steinberg, Psychoanalysis in Medicine, 2020
Sexual misconduct usually starts with relatively minor boundary violations, leading to a pattern of increasing intrusion, culminating in sexual contact. A slide down the “slippery slope” is more common than an abrupt shift from talking to sexual intercourse (Gutheil & Gabbard, 1993). A common sequence involves the physician and patient addressing each other by first names, having personal conversations intruding on clinical work, some body contact, meetings outside the office, sessions during meals, attendance at social events, culminating in sexual contact (Simon, 1989).
Prison Corruption
Published in Michael C. Braswell, Belinda R. McCarthy, Bernard J. McCarthy, Justice, Crime, and Ethics, 2019
Another form of misuse of authority that is receiving increased attention is sexual misconduct involving staff and inmates, staff against staff, and staff and offender family members and friends. To address this problem, the U.S. Congress passed the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (PREA). This act addresses the serious issue of prisoner sexual abuse by inmates and staff under custody. The U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics defines staff sexual misconduct as: “Any behavior or act of a sexual nature directed toward an inmate by an employee, volunteer, official visitor, or agency representative.” Romantic relationships between staff and inmates are included. Consensual and nonconsensual sexual acts include intentional touching of the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks with the intent to arouse or gratify sexual desire; completed, attempted, threatened, or requested sexual acts; and occurrences of indecent exposure, invasion of privacy, or staff voyeurism for sexual gratification (Smith & Yarussi, 2007, p. 5; see Box 15.3).
Legal Fundamentals
Published in Julie Dickinson, Anne Meyer, Karen J. Huff, Deborah A. Wipf, Elizabeth K. Zorn, Kathy G. Ferrell, Lisa Mancuso, Marjorie Berg Pugatch, Joanne Walker, Karen Wilkinson, Legal Nurse Consulting Principles and Practices, 2019
Tonia Aiken, Adam B. Kuenning, Flynn P. Carey, Karen E. Evans, Zakiya Sloley, Grace Morse-McNelis
Healthcare providers have been prosecuted in the criminal justice system, most often for Medicare and Medicaid fraud and abuse, drug diversion, nursing home patient abuse, failure to report elder or child abuse as required by statute, and sexual misconduct. (Both criminal and civil claims can be pursued against a healthcare provider for the same act or omission. The criminal action relates to the crime against society; the civil action relates to the injury incurred by an individual or entity.)
Examining Incidents of Sexual Misconduct Reported to Title IX Coordinators: Results from New York’s Institutions of Higher Education
Published in Journal of School Violence, 2021
Tara N. Richards, Lane Kirkland Gillespie, Taylor Claxton
Richards (2019) examined data from all incidents of sexual misconduct reported to Title IX coordinators (N = 1,054) at IHEs in a Mid-Atlantic state (N = 42). Findings showed the overwhelming majority of reported incidents – nearly 76% – were not adjudicated through the formal Title IX process. Among incidents that were adjudicated, less than half resulted in a student being found responsible for sexual misconduct, and less than half of cases with a “responsible student” were associated with either an expulsion (18%) or suspension (29%) of the responsible student. Similar suspension and expulsion rates (26% and 17% of founded cases, respectively) were identified by a Huffington Post investigative report using data from 32 public and private IHEs (Kingkade, 2014). Finally, Richards (2019) found victim accommodations to be the most common result from a sexual misconduct report: 72% of cases were associated with a referral to counseling, 29% with a no-contact order.
Describing the “Gray” Area of Consent: A Comparison of Sexual Consent Understanding Across the Adult Lifespan
Published in The Journal of Sex Research, 2021
Allyson S. Graf, Viviane Johnson
The findings from this study demonstrate that sexual consent is variable in how it is conceptualized by the general public, and this variability extends across the adult lifespan. This is problematic from a safety and legal standpoint and underscores why sexual consent understanding is a concern not only in personal sexual relationships but also in the application of those understandings in cases of legal judgment and policymaking (Benbow & Beeston, 2012; Moye & Marson, 2007). Regardless of whether individuals are navigating their own sexual relationships, they may encounter situations wherein they need to evaluate circumstances of sexual misconduct. This may happen in the workplace, in caregiving situations, or in performing civic duties as a juror. Health-care professionals, higher education administrators and staff, law enforcement officials, judges, and politicians may encounter matters in the capacity of their professions, wherein they may need to make informed statements as it pertains to sexual consent. Variability in definitions of sexual consent reduces clarity and lead to misinterpretation and confusion that may be codified as law, legal precedent, or formal policy.
In the Eye of the Reformer: Higher Education Personnel Perspectives on Campus Sexual Assault Policy Implementation
Published in Journal of School Violence, 2020
Carrie A. Moylan, Amy Hammock, Melanie L. Carlson
The survey included a total of 18 items meant to capture respondents’ perceptions of the priorities that drove how their own campus implemented policy reforms. Again, items were measured on a five-point Likert scale, with higher scores indicating that the respondent perceived the item to be a higher priority for the IHE. Based on existing research and factor analysis results (available by contacting the corresponding author), three subscales were identified. The first captured an IHE priority of implementing policy reform through a victim-centered lens. It consisted of 11 items with an alpha of .94. Example items include “ensuring victims have access to supportive resources” and “creating a trauma-informed system to respond to reports of sexual misconduct.” The second subscale captured IHE priorities centering on fairness and due process. This scale consisted of two items with an alpha of .75. The two items were “protecting the due process rights of accused students” and “ensuring the adjudication process is fair and equal for both complainants and respondents.” Finally, the third subscale captured IHE priorities centering on managing the campus’ public image. This subscale included three items, with an alpha of .69. Example items include “managing the public image of the campus” and “reassuring students, parents, donors, and other stakeholders.” All subscale scores were produced by calculating the mean of the included items.