Stop Proposed Title IX

These perverted tactics has one main goal to drain the resources and energy of the victims and their families, so they drop the case. 

“It’s atrocious that these people that are allowing this to happen have no consequences,”   Heiskala said, referring to school administrators. Her eight years old daughter was molested by her third-grade teacher, Mr. Reymond Firth.

Often it is not the incident that traumatizes our children, youth, and young adults. It is rather the cover up practices employed by school administrators results in deterioration in an emotional well-being of our children due to their perverted tactics and morals.

On November 16th, 2018 the Department of Education issued a press release that the proposed Title IX rule “provides clarity for schools, support for survivors, and due process rights to all.”  That is a distortion of the truth! This newly proposed regulation is written by school officials lobbyist group. 

The proposed “regulation leaves flexibility for a school to pursue informal resolution to be investigated through the school own employee.“

1.  How can a “designated school employee” be an “objective,” “fair,” and “unbiased investigator?” 

Clearly, this language grants schools a discretionary and discriminatory “grievance process” with an obvious conflict of interest.  They act as a judge, jury, and the executioner.

School officials’ highest priority is to protect their reputation, ensure an influx of donations, and shield themselves from financial liability.

2. Schools granted to designate their “own reasonable timeframe.” 

 Clearly granting schools “flexibility” to designate their “own reasonable timeframe” harms students and their families.   School officials are well-aware if they prolong the resolution of the incident, the case might be dropped eventually. We call it a “war of attrition.”  As the issue lingers, it induces uncertainty and anxiety, which morphs into depression and isolation.  Parents observe their child’s pain and agony and often believe if they drop the case, it will end their suffering, often that is more a perception than the reality. Therefore, granting schools their “own reasonable timeframe,” helps them drain and further traumatize the victims and their families. Resolution needs to be quick and just for victims to restore trust and confidence in the institution.

3. “No damages will be assessed against a school.” So how will school be deterred to stop cover up practices?

The proposed regulation states that the Department of Education “will not assess damages against a school as a remedy for a violation of these regulations, they will focus on enforcement efforts to bring schools into compliance of Title IX.”
“Leaving flexibility” and “not assessing any damages” is a detrimental outcome for our students, which totally at the mercy of schools who have no serious or substantial consequences. 

Note that some solutions need to be segmented between K-12 and for higher education due to differences in age, legality of guardians, and severity of incidents. The proposed Title IX has minimal inferences to the differences between K-12 to higher education. 

Those who are “Deliberately Indifferent” Must Be Held Personally Liable   

School officials and personnel who “deliberately indifferent” and use cover up tactics must be held personally liable.  Professionally, their license to practice in any institution should be revoked, nullifying confidential agreements.  Financially, they should pay for their own legal representation, withdrawing severance packages, pension plans and/or bonuses.