Assume you are a university professor holding a Ph.D. in education with an emphasis in women’s studies. In addition you have served as a rape victim advocate for five years and are currently sitting on two boards for rape response. You have been asked to sit on a judicial committee over a matter involving a student. You learn that the case involves an alleged sexual assault. You are appointed chairperson of that committee. Part of your job as chairperson includes the discretionary power over the admission of evidence and the conduct of the hearing.

The procedural rules you are to use as chair permit the accused to challenge you or any member of the committee for cause. Prior to the hearing, you have been asked by the accused male student that, if permitted, he would like to know whether you or other committee members have ever been a rape victim advocate. You deny the request based on your interpretation of the procedural rules.

The rules do not specifically prohibit or permit background questions of the committee. The rules are simply silent on the issue of questioning the committee. The interpretation of the rules is within your discretion as chair. Your service on the rape response board and your prior experience as a sexual assault victim advocate are on a Web site, but you have elected not to tell the accused that background information.

Question 1: Which of the following would be ethical courses of conduct for you to follow using a standard appropriate to an individual serving in a judicial capacity as chairperson of the student’s hearing?

A. Recuse yourself immediately without disclosure.

B. Disclose your background information and at least indicate to the parties that you feel you can be impartial.

C. Say nothing about your background and take the position that because your background information is on the university Web site, you have met any ethical obligation to disclose.

D. Disclose the information and recuse yourself if any party has an objection.

Please check which letter or letters you believe meets the appropriate ethical standards:

A. ………

B. ………

C. ………

D. ………

Question 2: Assume the chairperson with a background in sexual assault victim advocacy is asked by the accused student about that experience within the time for the accused to challenge committee members. The chairperson prohibits background questioning although no rule prohibits questions, does not voluntarily disclose her own experience as advocate and does not direct the accused to the Web site where the information can be obtained.

Has the chairperson in this scenario prejudiced the right of the accused to make a reasonably informed challenge?

Yes ……..

No ………

Question 3: Do you think that in light of your background as victim advocate you have an ethical obligation to permit some background questions including the specific question about rape victim advocacy? (This question assumes you and the other committee members would be given the option to withdraw if any individual did not wish to respond to inquiry.)

Yes ……

No …….

Please send your responses care of NAACP, James Varner, president, P.O. Box 477, Old Town 04468.