SafeSport alleges "culture of grooming and abuse" in U.S. figure skating

[AxelAnnie]

From Willin
As @It is not "technically" illegal. It is TOTALLY illegal. To say irresponsible, horrid role modeling, and encouraging out of control behavior. So, in your universe, drinking is in, but SafeSport allegations are in.

Twisted world.[/QUOTE]



I was debating whether or not it was worth it to reply to you, since you won't care about my reply or the actual realities of the situation. (And it's somewhat off topic)

Yes, I do think it does encourage out of control behavior in some situations, like the situations where parents send their kids to hotels with booze or where the parents leave the house when the kids hold a massive party the parents furnished the alcohol for or the cases where athletes go out to party together during travel competitions. All are bad and can lead to SafeSport or police reports.

But it many other situations I think it's perfectly acceptable. I know many people who didn't go through a binge drinking or party phase in college because their parents taught them how to drink in high school. When you have a glass of wine with the family every so often or have a round of beers with your friends at your house, drinking is no longer a novelty to exploit once you get to college. If your parents let you get drunk around them, you'll learn your limits so when you do get to college you'll know how many drinks you can safely have. I don't see an issue with that at all. In fact I think it's a good thing. For as many kids as I saw that drank with their parents present in high school and drank smartly in high school, I saw 10 more who weren't allowed to drink in high school and then had a lot of bad things happen to them once they got access to it in college (rape, sexual assault, hospital trips, injuries, academic probation, etc.)
[/QUOTE]

How do you know about care about? As to "realities of the situation(s)" that is up for grabs.

I would love to say that your observations prove the point. However, they don't. A glass or taste of wine at holidays (I am a Jew....we always have a blessing over wine). It doesn't necessarily create restraint. Just as feeding your child a healthy diet does not necessarily mean when on their own they won't eat poorly (freshman 10 anyone?)

Would you advocate sharing your Vicodin with kids in your home........so they know what it feels like, and won't do drugs later?

I highly recommend The Lost Years by Kristina Wandzilak and Constance Curry. Condoning something at home is condoning something.

Alcohol is a bitter beast. (It is not better, worse or the same as sexual assault just different).
And because alcohol is an accepted "drug" it is insidious. Giving kids a taste....great. (IMO) Giving your kid and friends a couple of rounds of beer..........really?

SafeSport (IMO) in order to be effective needs to get their poop in a group. Not that the issues should not be investigated......they should. In an atmosphere of safety for all parties. Not just the alleged aggrieved.

 

[starrynight]

Oh how interesting. It’s easy to fall into the trap of thinking that the US is like other English speaking Western countries but the cultural differences are clearly there. Especially around alcohol it seems. The idea of being considered a ‘kid’ around a beer at the age of 20 seems surreal to me, but the world is a big place.

 

[Deleted member 19433]

I was just reviewing U.S. Figure Skating's SafeSport handbook and there were a few things that I thought I had to be misreading.
https://www.usfsa.org/content/safesport handbook.pdf

In both these cases, the text in the main heading all makes sense, but then under the main heading it makes these statements:

EXAMPLES OF SEXUAL MISCONDUCT:
Touching offenses
Sexual relations or intimacies between Covered Individuals and an Athlete or Non-athlete Participant except in the event of a pre-existing relationship between spouses or life partners.

(page 13)

A "Non-athlete Participant" is "Any coach, trainer, team staff, medical or paramedical personnel, administrator, official, or other Athlete support personnel, employee or volunteer who participates in a U.S. Figure Skating-sanctioned event or activity through U.S. Figure Skating or a Member Club or Program" and all of the same groups of people also fall under "Covered Individuals."

SEXUAL HARASSMENT
Any conduct of a sexual nature directed by one Athlete or Non-athlete Participant toward another Athlete or Non-athlete Participant is presumed to be unwelcome and shall constitute sexual harassment.

(page 17)

What??? Am I missing something? If those two statements were to be taken literally, no one involved in skating in any way could ever have a sexual relationship with anyone else involved in skating in any way, regardless of age (except, possibly, in the case of a pre-existing relationship between spouses or life partners). I assume the main heading indicates what they really intend to be prohibiting and those subsections are just very poorly worded.

 

[hanca]

Wow, it's a shame to see the USFS and SafeSport attacking each other with neither organization (seemingly) doing anything for the athletes.

Re: SafeSport's allegations, I've seen a good number of pair relationships over the years (and sometimes just general skater relationships) that are in statutory rape territory. As other have pointed out, Katia and Sergei would've likely violated SafeSport regulations; likely Kovarikova and Novotny as well. It doesn't seem to be just a US thing. Skaters live in a bubble; pairs skaters live in a further bubble; the men in this bubble tend to be a good five-plus years older than the women in the bubble; most of the women that the 20-something men will encounter in this bubble are teenagers. Because the men in the bubble tend not to spend a lot of time in school and live fairly sheltered lives, the life stage differences inside the bubble are comparatively small, even though the physical differences are comparatively large. Hormones are high; add in adrenaline and very close physical contact.... In my view, this is an atmosphere that will cause sex between 20-something men and underage girls -- in the US or otherwise.

Is it deliberate grooming? I'm not sure. I tend to think no, actually -- it's probably a function of the strange dynamics of pairs skating versus deliberate ill-intent. But I am sure it's ignored. Mandatory reporters, including a lot of high profile coaches, are / were well aware of these relationships that violate professional code and sometimes the law, and do nothing. Judging by actions, skating (USFS and otherwise) has said -- at least to this point -- that these relationships are OK. If SafeSport is trying to point out this phenomenon, I think it's absolutely correct.

What to do about it? For one, the USFS could make very clear that any relationship that would constitute statutory rape (or possibly any relationship where one party is under 18) is always wrong, and anyone who knows about and doesn't report the relationship is subject to the same punishment as the offender. Some of the people who are speaking out about SafeSport, seem to be at least suggesting that Coughlin, in his 20s, had a relationship(s) with an older but possibly not yet legal teenager(s). And they seem to think that is/was OK. We seem to have a situation where SafeSport and those criticizing it are not that far apart on the facts, but are oceans apart on the meaning of those facts. If that's the case, everyone needs absolute clarity on what the facts mean -- without exception.

This, to me, would be a more productive discussion than mudslinging. Maybe some of the people who think this was OK would have an awakening that it was not, and maybe some of the people who want to throw the book at all offenders would recognize that there are mitigating factors that warrant much lighter punishment.

You keep using the term statutory rape, but in every country is has quite a different meaning. In the UK it is about sex (with penetration) with a child under 13, and it is because at that age they are not legally able to give consent. So saying that Katia and Sergei or Kovarikova/Novotny could be considered in statutory rape teritory is quite misleading. A child between 13 and 16 is still underage in the UK, but it is not considered a statutory rape. (I am not saying that sex with a child of this age is acceptable. It just doesn’t qualify as rape, even though it is still illegal.) and sex with someone over 16 is legal, so I doubt that Gordeeva and Grinkov would be in any sort of trouble legally (if they lived in the UK).

 

[LeafOnTheWind]

You keep using the term statutory rape, but in every country is has quite a different meaning.

I can see where the different definitions would be confusing for non US members here. But, IMO, the US definitions of any of the terms would be more relevant for discussion in this specific thread because Safe Sport is over US sports organizations and would follow US laws.

 

[hanca]

I can see where the different definitions would be confusing for non US members here. But, IMO, the US definitions of any of the terms would be more relevant for discussion in this specific thread because Safe Sport is over US sports organizations and would follow US laws.

Yes, Safe sport would follow US law, but if Louis mentioned Kovarikova/Novotny, they would obviously follow Czech law. And Katia and Sergei would follow Russian law. My point was, it is not a very good idea to try to fit actions of people from one country into the law system of another country.

 

[LeafOnTheWind]

Yes, Safe sport would follow US law, but if Louis mentioned Kovarikova/Novotny, they would obviously follow Czech law. And Katia and Sergei would follow Russian law.

I think Louis was just using them as an example of age differences and was not intending to say they had to follow US law.

 

[Prancer]

In the case of power differentials (coach and skater, boss and subordinate, teacher and student) things aren't necessarily illegal as long as both individuals are of age, but specific organizations (licensing boards, professional organizations, companies, etc.) may have specific rules against them that can lead a person to be fired or lose a license/certification.

Yep, if I have a sexual relationship with a student in a class, I will be fired, regardless of the student's age. I can be prosecuted legally if the student is a minor, but I will lose my job either way.

This is not just a legal issue, but an ethical one. If the ethical standards of the sport say that adults cannot have sexual relationships with minors or students, then they can't have sexual relationships with minors or students and continue in the sport.

 

[Willin]

Oh how interesting. It’s easy to fall into the trap of thinking that the US is like other English speaking Western countries but the cultural differences are clearly there. Especially around alcohol it seems. The idea of being considered a ‘kid’ around a beer at the age of 20 seems surreal to me, but the world is a big place.

As you can see in my discussion with other posters - me (20-something) and for the most part the millenial generation in the US completely agrees with you. As you can see from the other posters the older generations (even those old enough to remember when the drinking age was 18 in the US) are for some reason very much against underage drinking and think it's entirely irresponsible - ignoring the fact that research shows their own generation (including many parents of millenials) drank just as much if not more than us when they were underage. I can't speak for the posters criticizing my point of view, as I do not know them personally.
So I think it's very much a generational difference.

 

[starrynight]

It’s also worth remembering that the vast majority of organised sports is for school age kids who quit when they leave high school. (I personally didn’t know anyone who kept seriously training sports after school in an organised fashion).

So it makes sense that the rules are geared towards that.

The elite skaters who are still training in the organised system into their 20s and who would be able to enter into a relationship with a coach on equal terms are such a miniscule component of the overall scene.

 

[overedge]

What??? Am I missing something? If those two statements were to be taken literally, no one involved in skating in any way could ever have a sexual relationship with anyone else involved in skating in any way, regardless of age (except, possibly, in the case of a pre-existing relationship between spouses or life partners). I assume the main heading indicates what they really intend to be prohibiting and those subsections are just very poorly worded.

I think what you're missing is "presumed to be unwelcomed". That wording puts the onus on anyone wanting to go out with someone else in the sport to make sure that the other person really wants to go out with them, and isn't being coerced into doing anything they don't want to. IMO that wording is a good way to frame it.

 

[Deleted member 19433]

I think what you're missing is "presumed to be unwelcomed". That wording puts the onus on anyone wanting to go out with someone else in the sport to make sure that the other person really wants to go out with them, and isn't being coerced into doing anything they don't want to. IMO that wording is a good way to frame it.

That must be what they mean and that would make sense, it's just that they say "any" sexual conduct with no qualifiers or exceptions at all in that statement. They could say something like "affirmative consent is required in all sexual interactions" and that would be fine and a good policy but they don't even give that stipulation.

 

[MacMadame]

So I think it's very much a generational difference.

I think that's to simple. There are geographical, generational, cultural and religious differences at play here.

The US is a big country with people from all over the world. It's not like every Baby Boomer thinks exactly alike about all the issues. Some religions forbid everyone from partaking in alcohol, for example. Some parts of the country are way more conservative about alcohol than others and some are way more lax.

 

[overedge]

That must be what they mean and that would make sense, it's just that they say "any" sexual conduct with no qualifiers or exceptions at all in that statement. They could say something like "affirmative consent is required in all sexual interactions" and that would be fine and a good policy but they don't even give that stipulation.

It's pretty standard language in situations like this, where one party (like a young skater, or a skater without much experience in life outside the rink) might not be able to recognize when they are being treated inappropriately, or might feel pressured to do something because of the other person's status or power. "Affirmative consent" only really works if both parties are relatively equal and if both of them have the same understanding of what "consent" means. That's why this wording puts the onus on the other party to be sure that their intentions are truly welcomed.

 

[Deleted member 19433]

It's pretty standard language in situations like this, where one party (like a young skater, or a skater without much experience in life outside the rink) might not be able to recognize when they are being treated inappropriately, or might feel pressured to do something because of the other person's status or power. "Affirmative consent" only really works if both parties are relatively equal and if both of them have the same understanding of what "consent" means. That's why this wording puts the onus on the other party to be sure that their intentions are truly welcomed.

Thanks for the explanation of the terminology. It just seemed (and still seems) strange that there would be such a blanket statement without mentioning any exceptions for clearly consensual activity between adults where the person was clearly not taking advantage of whatever role they happen to occupy in an inappropriate way (e.g., I wouldn't see anything inappropriate at all about two coaches of similar "status" who met as adults, neither one coaching the other, and entered into a relationship that both clearly consented to). Obviously cases where one person was much younger or less mature and the older/more mature/more powerful person took advantage of that powerful position and coerced the other into something would be inappropriate and a violation of other sections (and if the younger person was below the age of consent, there would be legal issues as well).

 

[Prancer]

As you can see in my discussion with other posters - me (20-something) and for the most part the millenial generation in the US completely agrees with you. As you can see from the other posters the older generations (even those old enough to remember when the drinking age was 18 in the US) are for some reason very much against underage drinking and think it's entirely irresponsible - ignoring the fact that research shows their own generation (including many parents of millenials) drank just as much if not more than us when they were underage. I can't speak for the posters criticizing my point of view, as I do not know them personally.
So I think it's very much a generational difference.

Um, not that I want to derail this with a drinking discussion, but the reason the drinking age is 21 in the US is because the government gives less highway funding to states in which the drinking age is set below 21 (which is why there aren't any). And the government does this because multiple studies show that there are fewer alcohol-related fatalities in car accidents when the drinking age is set at 21 than there are when it is set below that. There are other reasons, but that's the primary one.

So the difference is not age (I was getting drinking age argument papers in freshman comp in 1991) or geographical culture or religion or anything else--it's that so many of us drive here and MADD was one of the most successful grassroots organizations ever in the US

If people want to discuss this further, I suggest starting a new thread about it in OTBT.

It’s also worth remembering that the vast majority of organised sports is for school age kids who quit when they leave high school. (I personally didn’t know anyone who kept seriously training sports after school in an organised fashion).

Unless, of course, you are a college athlete, which is not at all uncommon here.

 

[starrynight]

@Prancer Is US college sports an elite thing? I’m imagining that it’s not a recreational thing for the weekend like school aged sports often are?

 

[overedge]

Thanks for the explanation of the terminology. It just seemed (and still seems) strange that there would be such a blanket statement without mentioning any exceptions for clearly consensual activity between adults where the person was clearly not taking advantage of whatever role they happen to occupy in an inappropriate way.

It's probably based on a philosophy of "better safe than sorry". From my experience in dealing with similar issues in a different type of organization (not a sport), I feel pretty safe in saying that, if the language was written in any way other than a blanket statement, someone who did something inappropriate would find a way to claim, "I didn't do anything wrong because this wording doesn't say anything about it."

 

[Prancer]

@Prancer Is US college sports an elite thing? I’m imagining that it’s not a recreational thing for the weekend like school aged sports often are?

It depends. There are elite sports, but a lot of colleges also have recreational sports. At my college, the elite sports with scholarships are basketball, softball, volleyball, swimming and...some other things. But there are purely recreational groups for all those sports as well as soccer and a couple of others, and students can take fitness classes for fun and exercise. And there are degrees in physical fitness, too.

The elite athletes train hard. Everyone else plays as hard as they feel like playing.

 

[aftershocks]

Cue the outrage.

Uh, rather than outrage, might it be too much for everyone to learn from everything that happened in how this case was handled, so as to hopefully prevent future loss of life? Sadly, the threat that ultimately existed was to the accused at the hands of the accused (for whatever reason).

Cue the continued fingerpointing, jumping to conclusions, shifting of responsibility, and excuses for dropping any possible attempt to resolve the accusations.

 

[Prancer]

Uh, rather than outrage, might it be too much for everyone to learn from everything that happened in how this case was handled, so as to hopefully prevent future loss of life? Sadly, the threat that ultimately existed was to the accused at the hands of the accused (for whatever reason).

Cue the continued fingerpointing, jumping to conclusions, shifting of responsibility, and excuses for dropping any possible attempt to resolve the accusations.

Okay. How WOULD you (or anyone else who thinks SafeSport is doing this all wrong) like to see the accusations resolved? And I am not looking for some general "in a way that protects both accuser and accused" but for a specific proposal for how you would go about:

1. Protecting the identity or identities of the accusers
2. Protecting the identity of the accused
3. Protecting potential victims of the accused during the investigation process
4. Bringing forward other accusers, if any

Because it seems to me that all of those things are necessary. Perhaps it doesn't to others, so feel free to modify the list as needed, but please explain your reasons for doing so.

Also, if your answer is "I don't know, but there must be a way," be aware that I will consider this a waste of bandwidth, as it isn't helpful at all.

 

[nlloyd]

Based on this quote I wonder how many of the "athletes and members" that have "expressed concern" to USFSA are skaters/coaches right in HQ's own backyard who happen to be friends of Dalilah.

This is a near universal sentiment among those who have dealt with the Center for SafeSport or heard accurate details of their investigations and outcomes. There are multiple cases in figure skating alone that have stretched over a year with no end in sight, whereas U.S. Figure Skating has explicit (listed in the rulebook) short time frames for grievances.

Just to clarify: are you saying that the "near universal sentiment" is that SafeSport takes too long to complete its investigations or that the concerns expressed to the USFSA about SafeSport are by skaters/coaches who have a vested interest?

The SafeSport code is less restrictive than U.S. Figure Skating's rules were, and there have been coaches "cleared" by SafeSport for conduct that would have resulted in a ban from U.S. Figure Skating. The Center has prohibited USFS from implementing interim measures like not being allowed to travel with Team USA, which used to be possible.

(I think it's important to add that while I believe strongly that USFS handled reported cases of sexual misconduct better than SafeSport is handling them, I'm also aware that many, many people were reluctant to report their abuse to the internal system. I am not advocating for jurisdiction over allegations of sexual misconduct to be returned to U.S. Figure Skating.)

I remember reading a post from you in early January that seemed to support SafeSport or at least the fact that it did not act impulsively or without cause:

"The Center for SafeSport does not issue interim measures lightly. There have been a number of figure skating cases cleared without any publicity and/or are under investigation without any interim measures. The SafeSport guidelines for sexual misconduct, the type of SafeSport cases handled by the Center, are not vague at all. For interim restrictions to be issued, it's significantly more than "making someone uncomfortable." https://www.fsuniverse.net/forum/threads/does-anyone-know-about-the-subject-of-this-article-on-john-coughlin-in-usa-today.105077/#post-5498937.

Do you still have confidence in SafeSport and if so, do you see this earlier post as reconcilable with your more recent one? Do you feel that SafeSport does a thorough job at the start and does not act impulsively BUT that they take too long to complete their investigations. I only ask because I have long respected your posts and gave particular weight to your earlier one. I was thus surprised to hear your recent criticism of SafeSport, but understand that it is possible to hold these two opinions without contradicting oneself. I am simply interested in whether you have lost confidence in SafeSport since your early January post.

 

[MacMadame]

So the difference is not age (I was getting drinking age argument papers in freshman comp in 1991) or geographical culture or religion or anything else--it's that so many of us drive here and MADD was one of the most successful grassroots organizations ever in the US

To clarify, I was not talking about the drinking age when I mentioned those factors but attitudes towards drinking especially underage drinking.

 

[aftershocks]

Okay. How WOULD you (or anyone else who thinks SafeSport is doing this all wrong) like to see the accusations resolved? And I am not looking for some general "in a way that protects both accuser and accused" but for a specific proposal for how you would go about:

1. Protecting the identity or identities of the accusers
2. Protecting the identity of the accused
3. Protecting potential victims of the accused during the investigation process
4. Bringing forward other accusers, if any

Because it seems to me that all of those things are necessary...

Hey, but do you have all the answers then? Do you even know what the actual accusations against the accused are? Was there a pattern of abusive behavior, or just the retroactive cultural awareness in the age of #MeToo that the accused shouldn't have been dating skaters who were underage when he was in his early twenties 10 to 12 years ago? We do not have enough information. And I think part of the problem going forward is that in order for healing, resolution and reconciliation to occur, the actual circumstances need to be brought out (without identifying the alleged victims or the accuser). From what's been speculated, it was a third party who came forward re the latter two complaints and not the alleged victims, who were formerly minors. What is the relationship of the accuser to the alleged victims, if any? And is there any current or former connection between the third party accuser and the accused?

I don't think the humanity of either the accused or the accusers should be lost sight of in this situation. I also think we need to guard against a rush to judgement and lumping of all cases of accusations of sexual misconduct with cases of egregious, horrific, intentional sexual abuse. There needs to be educational workshops and awareness campaigns because we are talking about human emotions and human relationships in the context of a sport in which physical contact unavoidably takes place on a regular basis. Just look at all of the hugging, patting, caressing and close physical contact that goes on in the kiss 'n cry at every competition.

Let's keep in mind that the worst cases of sexual abuse are never reported, and that in far too many cases, such abuses happen in families. We all live in this world, so surely many of us have either experienced challenging situations ourselves in the workplace, or we know of instances where those close to us may have experienced sexual harassment in workplaces or other settings. Let's not lose sight of the fact that our emotions are involved and that taking sides and getting on high horses is not going to solve anything.

In this specific case, I don't know what happened. But I feel strongly that people need to stop conflating this case with every other known situation of abusive interactions. Obviously, there are important issues in this sport on a number of levels (including eating disorders) that need to be addressed and resolved with clear heads, and neither USFS nor SafeSport are acting responsibly in the aftermath of Coughlin's death. A taskforce should be convened to responsibly examine the skating culture and specific cases, in order to come up with guidelines and forward-thinking initiatives. Most importantly, allow this moment in the history of this sport to guide us forward responsibly and beneficially for everyone. Let Coughlin's death not be in vain. Let these accusations not be swept under the rug.

I value human life and I don't believe that anyone should have died in this situation. Let's not take sides and point accusing fingers, but instead try to understand what happened and find a way to learn from what happened. For that to take place, we need to get beyond our emotions. IMO, any investigative body realizing that individuals have been accused and later exonerated, might consider proceeding with caring and compassion for everyone involved. Allow the accused and the accusers to have access to counseling. Why couldn't there have been an opportunity for the initial accused and the accuser to possibly meet with each other and an arbitrator to gain understanding and reconciliation? If a lot of people knew about the earlier instances of the accused dating minors, then what exactly do the accusations, reportedly from a third party, involve? Each case should be handled on the basis of what the circumstances are and not conflated or generalized with other cases.

I feel that compassionate attempts should have been made to reach out to the accused as well as to the accusers. If the accused was currently coaching minors, everyone he currently worked with should have been questioned as to his conduct within the immediate timeframe. IMO, there should also already be on file an official statement from the accused regarding the specifics of the case. There certainly was enough time for that to have taken place. The timing of the sudden suspension a week out from U.S. Nationals was IMHO extremely insensitive, likely due to ignorance on the part of SafeSport regarding the activities and nature of the sport itself. If SafeSport is understaffed, and unable to handle investigations in a timely manner, then they end up doing more harm than good. We all should be concerned about the need to have a safe, compassionate, knowledgeable, judicious and fully funded investigative body handling complaints.

Is this a situation, as someone pointed out earlier, where the accused having been a male in a sport where males are prized, possibly took access for granted because he was often in settings with younger females? If so, why is there an assumption that so-called 'grooming' was going on intentionally? And how do we know that the accused might not have looked back and felt at an older age, that perhaps he shouldn't have been dating girls younger than he was? But at that time, no one objected or questioned the relationships, so did he feel hopeless about defending against such behavior 12 to 15 years later? IMO, that's a situation which requires rehabilitation, understanding and reconciliation, not punishment and banishment from the sport. It is completely different from the horrific specter of an optometrist sexually abusing a 7-year-old in the examining room while her parents sat in the waiting room (a true incident that happened to someone I know).

In figure skating, the case of young females paired with older boys in their early twenties, means clear guidelines should be in place. But it's also important to understand that each and every case is different. We shouldn't generalize. @Louis got at the crux of this in his earlier post. Louis mentioned famous pairs from an earlier generation where the males were older than the females, and in each case the partners ended up becoming romantically involved, and later marrying. But those are specific and unique cases involving skaters from different cultures and backgrounds. Guidelines, awareness, clarity, common sense and education are needed at this point and in this cultural moment, not fingerpointing, generalizing, bandwagoning, and political correctness.

When we are looking at pairs partnerships between young people, there could be mutual attraction; there could be no attraction on either side; the young female could have a crush on her older partner, or vice versa. It's the vice versa with the older male possibly having an attraction to the younger female which is apparently the greater concern. In these cases, adults (parents and coaches) should be involved and counseling should be made available to assist both parties in understanding that the focus should be placed on their competitive partnership. They should be guided to give themselves time to mature as people and to guard against becoming emotionally attached or caught up in unhealthy relationships.

There are all kinds of situations and relationships which should not be lumped together. But that does not negate the urgent need to recognize and address the endemic problems that do exist in figure skating. I fear that neither SafeSport, USFS, nor the ISU are focused on rising to this enormous and complicated task.

 

[Deleted member 19433]

It's probably based on a philosophy of "better safe than sorry". From my experience in dealing with similar issues in a different type of organization (not a sport), I feel pretty safe in saying that, if the language was written in any way other than a blanket statement, someone who did something inappropriate would find a way to claim, "I didn't do anything wrong because this wording doesn't say anything about it."

It's not "safe" though to have policies that are so vague that even completely innocuous behavior could be technically considered a violation, and when being found in violation of the policy (even if not in violation of the law) results in being placed on a public list and can cost someone their livelihood. I don't think false or bad faith accusations are common (and they in themselves are also a violation), but they are possible and it's pretty scary how broad some of the prohibitions would seem to be on a literal reading of some of the policies.

 

[UGG]

As you can see in my discussion with other posters - me (20-something) and for the most part the millenial generation in the US completely agrees with you. As you can see from the other posters the older generations (even those old enough to remember when the drinking age was 18 in the US) are for some reason very much against underage drinking and think it's entirely irresponsible - ignoring the fact that research shows their own generation (including many parents of millenials) drank just as much if not more than us when they were underage. I can't speak for the posters criticizing my point of view, as I do not know them personally.
So I think it's very much a generational difference.

I am 41. I think the drinking age should remain 21. When I was 19 I thought the drinking age should be 18. Honestly, life goes by so fast one day you are 18, the next day you wake up and are 40 and it doesn't matter what year you were legally able to have a drink because if it was 18 or 21 it was still a long @$$ time ago LOL! Anyway I have really funny memories of trying to get beer, tying cases of beer on ropes and pulling them in my friend's bedrooms, random people going into the liquor store for us. Some of my favorite memories would not be there if we could just walk in a liquor store LOL

 

[Prancer]

A whole lot of things

So if I understand you correctly, you made four somewhat specific proposals.

A taskforce should be convened to responsibly examine the skating culture and specific cases, in order to come up with guidelines and forward-thinking initiatives.

Who should form this task force? SafeSport or the USFS? I would assume, given that the task force would be examining skating culture, that it would be the USFS. But the USFS would not have access to the investigation material for specific cases. Or should it be a joint effort?

Allow the accused and the accusers to have access to counseling.

Are they in some way stopped from having counseling? Or are you saying that counseling should be provided? If so, by whom and who foots the bill? Same questions for your later statement that pair skaters possibly getting romantically involved should be guided and offered counseling. Should this be actual policy or should something like that be decided by the parents and coaches as on a case-by-case basis--in which case, why would this even need to be proposed, as that is already what happens?

Why couldn't there have been an opportunity for the initial accused and the accuser to possibly meet with each other and an arbitrator to gain understanding and reconciliation?

So if I want to accuse my coach of sexual misconduct, I would have to do it knowing that I might have to meet him in a situation designed to gain understanding and reconciliation?

Or is this just something that you think should be offered with full right of refusal? If that is the case, is there anything to stop this from happening? Or does it have to be officially offered? If so, by whom? Who appoints the arbitrator and who pays for this?

Each case should be handled on the basis of what the circumstances are and not conflated or generalized with other cases.

Is there some reason to think that this doesn't happen? I am very confused by this statement. Who is handling cases based on something other than the circumstances and is conflating and generalizing one case with a lot of others? I don't see how that would even be possible for investigators. Or are you saying that there shouldn't be any actual policy for handling sexual misconduct complaints but that each case should be decided at every step by what the investigator(s) thinks about the circumstances? Or are you talking about the responses of the general public and how some of them apparently think all sexual misconduct is pedophilia or something?

I am really more interested in knowing that people think SafeSport should do--specifically--when investigating sexual misconduct that is different from what they are doing now and why people think other options would be more effective.

 

[overedge]

It's not "safe" though to have policies that are so vague that even completely innocuous behavior could be technically considered a violation, and when being found in violation of the policy (even if not in violation of the law) results in being placed on a public list and can cost someone their livelihood. I don't think false or bad faith accusations are common (and they in themselves are also a violation), but they are possible and it's pretty scary how broad some of the prohibitions would seem to be on a literal reading of some of the policies.

It's not vague. It says that all contact is presumed to be unwelcome, which implies that it's presumed to be unwelcome *unless proven otherwise*. In the example that you keep bringing up, of two adults who know what they're doing and who have established consent, it's highly unlikely that SafeSport would get involved - and as I've previously said, making the language this strong makes it very clear that the onus is on anyone in a position of power to be sure that the person they're "contacting" is truly consenting.

We've gone over false accusations in other discussions of SafeSport already, but, yes, they do happen, and that is why there's an investigative process for the complaints. Publicizing the accused's name and the nature of the accusations about them is the same as what happens in the civil/criminal justice system.

 

[AxelAnnie]

As you can see in my discussion with other posters - me (20-something) and for the most part the millenial generation in the US completely agrees with you. As you can see from the other posters the older generations (even those old enough to remember when the drinking age was 18 in the US) are for some reason very much against underage drinking and think it's entirely irresponsible - ignoring the fact that research shows their own generation (including many parents of millenials) drank just as much if not more than us when they were underage. I can't speak for the posters criticizing my point of view, as I do not know them personally.
So I think it's very much a generational difference.

Willin,

I think it is both generational and age related.

Generational:

I was born in 1949. Alcohol was everywhere as I grew up. Remember, though these were the days before there was the information available about the dangers that we have available today. I will also add that my mother, father, and almost all of my mother's family died of alcoholism.

College - tons of under age drinking. That was drinking to get drunk..... I could never understand that.

As drugs came on the scene, drinking became less of a thing. And so did Bill W.

Age:

The rational part of a teen's brain isn't fully developed and won't be until age 25 or so. In fact, recent research has found that adult and teen brains work differently. Adults think with the prefrontal cortex, the brain's rational part.

So, IMO, assuming that introducing teens to alcohol thinking that it will remove the mystery and kids won't drink is a good theory.....but specious.

Kids also do not have that feeling of mortality. I will give you an example from riding. Adult riders who started as children are a whole different enchilada on a horse than riders who started as an adult. Adults are more cautious...........as well they should be. If a kid falls and breaks an arm, well it is inconvenient, painful, and all that. But they have a parental structure who will make sure they are taken care of. They don't have to worry about missing work, taking care of the kids and all that fun stuff.

Hence, it is not surprising that under-age drinkers would think it will do no harm, and turn out fine.......and they are right....until it doesn't.

 

[Deleted member 19433]

.