UCLA professor of psychology Paul Abramson’s new book criticizes the policies of various universities regarding romance between faculty and students.
The book, titled “Romance in the Ivory Tower,” explores the history of institutional legislation on sexuality in academia and analyzes the bodies of laws governing such relationships at several universities around the United States.
Choices regarding whom individuals should date and become involved with romantically are within each individual’s personal sphere of autonomy, Abramson said.
“There is ultimately some area over which we have sole discretion over making decisions and choices about who we are as people,” he said.
Abramson also said he believes that to some extent, the practice of educational institutions’ policies against faculty-student relationships is an infringement upon freedom of intellectual choice, much like an individual’s rights to freedom of speech and choice of faith.
“Who you love is a no less personal or fundamental choice,” Abramson said about one’s choice of religion, adding that “this is an arena that should be protected and immune from government intrusion.”
Reasons for the institutional ban on these relationships include concern on behalf of universities that civil litigation suits may arise on grounds of sexual harassment, coercion, and conflict of interest disputes.
“Universities have very deep pockets, and lots of people would want to sue them for any of a number of reasons,” Abramson said.
Monica Sanchez, vice president of internal affairs of the Graduate Students Association, said too that relationships between faculty and students can be sources of tremendous problems for both the individuals involved and the institution in oversight.
“I understand the UC’s policy in trying to protect students … especially undergraduates who might be a little younger and might not know as much about the risks,” she said.
Sanchez, a doctoral student in social sciences and comparative education, said that the issue is a complex one but that she too has reservations regarding the university’s right to decide for her whom she may and may not date.
“It’s a tricky situation; I don’t recommend or condone it, but at the same time, I understand that graduate students work closely and personally with professors. … You could find your lifelong partner with similar interests,” she said.
English graduate student Mac Harris said he was in agreement on the delicacy of such situations and said that relationships between faculty and students should be avoided.
“I think it’s a bad idea,” he said. “It’s too complicated and compromised a relationship. … There is too great a power structure differential.”
The book also breaks down what Abramson says are flaws in the language of these institutional laws.
“They’re using sexual harassment as a Trojan horse to put in other areas of sexuality that they object to for one reason or another,” he said, noting that “what is unique about (the policies of) Yale and UC is that their policies were instated after very highly publicized sexual harassment cases.”
He added that the laws were likely designed to be this way, and that if faculty-student dating rules had been included inadvertently, “there would be more specific nomenclature for romance.”
Abramson said that processing cases of sexual harassment and conflict of interest should occur on a case-by-case basis, and that laws and rules already exist that protect against such problems. He said that waivers could be signed to safeguard against civil suits.
But Sanchez expressed concern over the logistics of such a system, saying that a waiver and individual case analysis might not be a practical expectation of the school’s administration.
“They need to look at it on a case-by-case basis, although it is more difficult to do it that way,” she said.
Regardless of functional concerns, Abramson said what he sees as unjust university rules must be amended in a way that is mutually beneficial for faculty, students and institutions. Administrators must find a solution that helps the university avoid these kinds of litigation yet allows faculty to have relationships with students in the ways they choose, he said.