FAQ SEXUAL MISCONDUCT GUIDELINE
click Q. to see the answer
Q. Where do I find RC’s Guideline on sexual misconduct?
Q. If I have a concern about sexual misconduct, what do I do?
Q. How is a concern about sexual misconduct handled?
Q. What do we mean by sexual misconduct in RC?
Q. Don’t we already have a process for addressing sexual misconduct in RC?
Q. Why are we now adopting a more formal Guideline on sexual misconduct, that seems so “legal” and has such a formal process?
Q. How does this Guideline protect us?
Q. What does this mean for our culture of hugging and closeness?
Q. We understand that this Guideline is important for the U.S., but does the rest of the RC Community have to follow it?
Q. If someone has concerns about sexual misconduct in RC, will they know that the Guideline exists and how to get help to address their concerns?
Q. I never worried about sexual harassment in RC until this Guideline was proposed. Is this really needed in RC?
Q. As an RRP with this Guideline am I now liable for sexual harassment that happens in my Region?
Q. I am concerned that people may use this to legitimize their early feelings and it could open the floodgates to legal actions against any RC leader.
Q. Are RC leaders and the CRC trained on this Guideline and their responsibilities?
Q. Who can be consulted about a complaint given the statement about confidentiality? What can a leader who was told about the incident do to get resource and guidance for handling the situation?
Q. Does the RC Community have the resources and the capacity to do the necessary ‘investigation’?
Q. How does our Guideline A.5. (Confidentiality) apply to this Guideline?
Q. Why is the women’s ILRP or her designee always on the CRC, rather than the men’s ILRP or the ILRP for LGBTQ+ people?
Q. What if something happened in the past that people want to raise a complaint about?
Q. Is documentation of the actions taken by the RRP and CRC desired or required?
Q. Isn’t it a problem for us if people tell us there has been sexual harassment, but choose to proceed informally (i.e. reject using Guideline M.5. Part A or M.5. Part B)?
Q. This type of misconduct often involves “power dynamics” (age, race, sex, etc.). How do we address these power dynamics in RC? For example, how would a younger person feel empowered to report something they believed was harassment if most of the leadership is much older?
Q. How do you judge that a person found to have engaged in sexual misconduct is now ready to re-integrate into the RC Community?
Q. What will we do if a person does the same thing again after we have addressed it once? Could we be accused of condoning these behaviors by allowing them to stay in or return to RC?
Q. In my early years in RC, I had big infatuations with RCers and it was very useful to fall in love and work openly on the crush. That doesn’t seem possible now.
Q. What will we do in a jurisdiction where the form of sexual misconduct concerned about is considered criminal activity? What protection do we have for the actions we take?
Q. The culture in my country is very different from that in the Global North and much of what is considered sexual misconduct in the Guideline is not considered sexual misconduct in my country. How do I think about that in applying the Guideline?
Q. How does RC think about what is called a “survivor-centered approach” outside of RC? Many of us have been trained or done this work outside of RC and the RC approach is very different.
Q. What have we learned from our first complaints?
Q. How will a complaint proceed if the person is saying sexual misconduct has occurred but wants to proceed informally?
Q. Are we consulting with lawyers about how we are handling any complaints of sexual misconduct?
Q. Is a workshop leader expected to address a concern about sexual misconduct at a workshop during the workshop?
Q. If a complaint comes to an ILRP, do they stay involved throughout the complaint process?
Q. If two RCers who only know each other through RC are having a sexual relationship, is that sexual misconduct?
Q. What is “conduct of a sexual nature?”
Lyndall KatzQ. Where do I find RC’s Guideline on sexual misconduct?
In Guideline M.5. Handling Oppressor Patterns, Including Sexual Misconduct and Addressing Mistakes, Disagreements, and Criticism. Part A is RC’s process for handling oppressor patterns, mistakes, disagreements, and criticism in RC. Part B lays out a more formal process for raising a concern of sexual misconduct and its resolution. Some RCers may prefer to use Part A or other informal process to address sexual misconduct instead of using the more formal process in Part B. The choice between these options is always up to the person who raised the concerns. Those options are outlined clearly in the document “Raising a Concern about Sexual Misconduct in the RC Community,” found here, along with other resources for understanding the Guideline.
Q. If I have a concern about sexual misconduct, what do I do?
Anyone with a concern about sexual misconduct occurring in RC should contact an RC teacher or leader or email the Guideline M.5. Part B Complaint Review Committee, at committee@rc.org. You may ask another Co-Counselor to raise the concern for you, but RC leadership will want to talk to you personally at some point.
Q. How is a concern about sexual misconduct handled?
The person raising the concern has the option of proceeding informally, with or without a leader’s assistance. They may also choose to proceed under Guideline M.5. Part A or Guideline M.5. Part B. Information about the concern will be gathered from the person raising the concern, the person complained about, and any witnesses. A determination will be made by the Reference People involved under the Guideline M.5. Part A process, or by a Complaint Review Committee working with the local Reference People under Guideline M.5. Part B. The flowchart “Raising a Concern of Sexual Misconduct” on this resource page describes the process in more detail.
Q. What do we mean by sexual misconduct in RC?
“Sexual misconduct includes sexual advances or stalking, sexual requests, sexual harassment, and other unwelcome behaviors and communications of a sexual nature. We define sexual harassment in RC as conduct of a sexual nature—verbal, written, physical, visual, or electronic—that is serious, or unwelcome and repeated,” Guideline M.5. Part B. More detailed information about this definition and examples of sexual misconduct can be found on the resource page (see Definitions and Examples).
Katie Kauffman, Mount BakerQ. Don’t we already have a process for addressing sexual misconduct in RC?
Concerns about sexual misconduct have been addressed on a case-by-case basis up until now, usually by local Reference People. They have listened to the person who feels aggrieved, listened to the person complained about, counseled each of them, and worked to find a solution. The process in the 2017 Guideline O.3. was applied.
Q. Why are we now adopting a more formal Guideline on sexual misconduct, that seems so “legal” and has such a formal process?
We are proposing a Guideline on Sexual misconduct to strengthen and further clarify our commitment to creating an environment in the RC Community that is free of sexual misconduct. In addition, we propose this Guideline out of concerns about the RC Community’s vulnerability to legal action in the U.S. With RC headquarters located in the U.S., we must take the U.S. political and legal system into account in developing our Guidelines.
Q. How does this Guideline protect us?
Establishing, disseminating, educating people about, and applying our sexual misconduct policy and complaint procedure are important steps toward limiting the RC Community’s vulnerability to legal action. Having the policy will not by itself insulate us from being sued by someone who believes they have been sexually harassed in RC, but it will make it less likely. If we are sued, that we have taken these steps gives us a good defense. The more we follow our Guideline, the better our protection.
Q. What does this mean for our culture of hugging and closeness?
We want to create an atmosphere of caring and closeness, where each RCer feels free to talk about what they do and don’t welcome in terms of respectful physical contact. We all have big hurts around closeness and sex and these issues will be addressed in RC classes. Fundamentals teachers, in the first classes of a series, will invite students to talk, discharge about, and state whether they want to hold hands, be hugged, sit close to others in a class, and so on. Students’ choices should be respected, though we can thoughtfully encourage them to consider that limiting respectful close contact with other RCers in class may result from their early hurts and change with discharge over time.
Tommy Atz, Grand Canyon in Oman
Q. We understand that this Guideline is important for the U.S., but does the rest of the RC Community have to follow it?
We don’t want sexual harassment to happen anywhere in RC, and we want to have an effective way to redress it if it does happen. There is also a benefit to having a consistent policy across the various RC Communities. Guideline M.5. Part B. provides that. Guideline M.5. Part A can also be applied to raise concerns about sexual misconduct, at the choice of the person bring forth a concern. In addition, a local Community can also apply Guideline L.2. to this situation and seek the IRP’s approval of an exception to this Guideline (until confirmation of the exception at the next World Conference).
Q. If someone has concerns about sexual misconduct in RC, will they know that the Guideline exists and how to get help to address their concerns?
Every Reference Person and teacher of RC will be informed about the Guideline and how to handle concerns about sexual misconduct. Most people new to RC start with a Fundamentals class, and the teacher will talk about sexual misconduct and our Guideline in that class. (The Fundamentals Teaching Guide has been updated with a new Chapter 32, “Misconduct in RC.”) Workshops and other classes should also address the importance of the Guideline. Every person who purchases the RC Fundamentals Manual also gets a copy of our Guidelines.
Q. I never worried about sexual harassment in RC until this Guideline was proposed. Is this really needed in RC?
We do a lot of work inside the RC Community on sex, sexuality, sexism, male domination, and other forms of oppression and the ways oppression is internalized. That we do this work helps create an environment where patterns are interrupted and discharged on rather than carried out. We have other safeguards against sexual misconduct as well.
However, sexual misconduct is and has been a big problem throughout our societies, and people often bring their struggles with them into the RC Community. There are many forces in society that work to silence oppressed people (especially about anything connected to sex), and many people have distresses that make them reluctant to speak up if they are harmed. We think having an explicit guideline addressing sexual misconduct will make it more likely that people who have been harmed will come forward if sexual misconduct occurs. We are also training our leaders about the Guideline, which we think will increase awareness and understanding of sexual misconduct and harassment. (Hopefully this effort will also help us foster an environment free of sexual misconduct and harassment.) We want to know about sexual misconduct that happens in RC and we will address it.
Q. As a RRP with this Guideline am I now liable for sexual harassment that happens in my Region?
Whether or not we have a written Guideline, the RC Community, and its leaders, have a legal responsibility to prevent and address sexual misconduct in the RC Community. Leaders in RC and the RC Community can be sued in many countries if sexual misconduct occurs in RC, whether or not we have this (or any) Guideline. The legal standard of what is required of RC is the same whether we have a Guideline or not, with the exception that we must now follow the process outlined in the Guideline. Having the Guideline/policy will not by itself prevent RC or an RRP from being sued by someone who believes they have been sexually harassed in RC, but it will make it less likely. Having this Guideline and process in writing provides us a strong defense to claims that we are not addressing sexual harassment in RC.
Steve BanburyQ. I am concerned that people may use this to legitimize their early feelings and it could open the floodgates to legal actions against any RC leader.
Lawyers take cases of sexual harassment when they think there is a high likelihood that they will succeed (and so get paid). They won’t want to only sue an individual, since most individuals don’t have enough assets to make a lawsuit against an individual worthwhile. So they would sue RCCR as well, and would look closely at the situation to evaluate their likelihood of success. RCCR will vigorously defend our sexual misconduct Guideline and our implementation of it in the RC Community. A person bringing a lawsuit will have to show something like the following to win:
-
That an RC leader knew or should have known that conduct violating this Guideline was happening in their Area or Region (should have known would include things like that the person accused had demonstrated such behaviors in the past and the leader was aware of this and didn’t take any action, or possibly didn’t take effective action)
-
That the misconduct happened to a minor and we didn’t have consent from the parent for them to participate in RC or the event
-
That the person accused of sexual misconduct was a leader or teacher in RC and we didn’t exercise adequate supervision of them, or they should not have been in that position of authority or leadership
-
That we received a complaint under the Guideline and didn’t adequately investigate or address it (we didn’t follow our own policy)
We are much more vulnerable to a legal action if we fail to have a sexual misconduct policy in place.
Q. Are RC leaders and the CRC trained on this Guideline and their responsibilities?
Yes. We started training Reference People in the fall of 2022 and have offered training for RRP, ARP, and teachers. Most teachers will be trained by their local Reference People (Area or Regional). We also expect leaders to participate in the regular RRP/ILRP calls, special workshops, and general workshops on sex, related topics, and leadership, where we can discharge on distresses we have related to the Guideline.
Q. Who can be consulted about a complaint given the statement about confidentiality? What can a leader who was told about the incident do to get resource and guidance for handling the situation?
Any leader who hears about sexual misconduct should inform their RRP and a member of the CRC (committee@rc.org). RRPs should consult with the CRC as soon as possible. The RRP and the CRC should decide together about consulting with outside resource. (Some other leaders in the RC Community have experience outside RC in handling such complaints and might be useful to consult with, or you may know someone who has such experience.) This consultation can happen without revealing the names of the RCers involved (where possible, we should avoid revealing names). If it would benefit the process to closely involve someone besides yourself and the CRC, you can and should do that with the agreement of the CRC. The confidentiality provision doesn’t prohibit such consultation, see Guideline A.5.
Q. Does the RC Community have the resources and the capacity to do the necessary ‘investigation’?
We have always taken complaints of sexual misconduct seriously and taken steps similar to those that are part of the process in Guideline M.5. Part B. To guide the RRP and the CRC, we have developed flowcharts and outlined the steps we think should be taken in a “Guide” (found at Resources for Addressing Sexual Misconduct). If an RRP and the CRC member(s) working with you believe you don’t have enough resources to proceed, please contact the IRP. We are committed to making this process work for everyone involved, and we can help you find the resources you need both to stop sexual misconduct and investigate the concerns people bring to us.
You will want to take notes as necessary to do a comprehensive job of looking into the situation. You may need to collect copies of emails, or texts, or other documents that could constitute sexual misconduct. Any notes you take, or documents you collect, can be obtained if a legal action is filed.
Damien CookQ. How does our Guideline A.5. (Confidentiality) apply to this Guideline?
We have decided that the importance of addressing sexual misconduct outweighs confidentiality. When a Co-Counselor believes there has been sexual misconduct in a session, our confidentiality Guideline will not apply to the content of the session. If a Co-Counseling learns of sexual misconduct in a session, the confidentiality Guideline will not be applied and the Co-Counselor should address the sexual misconduct. Please encourage any Co-Counselor who has experienced or has information about sexual misconduct to go to their Reference Person and inform them.
Q. Why is the women’s ILRP or her designee always on the CRC, rather than the men’s ILRP or the ILRP for LGBTQ+ people?
The women’s ILRP or her designee is on the CRC because of the extensive experience she has with sexism and sexual exploitation of women. Women comprise the majority of people targeted with sexual misconduct. We also want some consistency of members on the CRC over time, so we can benefit from their experience in handling these concerns.
In choosing the other members of each CRC, the IRP and the women’s ILRP will consider the constituencies of the person complained of and the person raising the concern so that leaders knowledgeable of those constituencies will be represented on the CRC. Several additional ILRPs or their designees are likely to be invited to join the CRC.
Q. What if something happened in the past that people want to raise a complaint about?
This Guideline took effect when the World Conference approved it in August 2022. It isn’t retroactive. But we want to hear people’s concerns about incidents that happened in the past that they don’t believe were resolved. An active RCer can bring these concerns to their RRP, who can consult with the CRC. The CRC may decide to look into the situation, especially if the person complained about is currently participating in RC.
Q. Is documentation of the actions taken by the RRP and CRC desired or required?
It’s not required, but the investigation must be thorough and fair and the actions taken must be appropriate to the finding of what happened. You may need to take notes to do a good job. Any notes kept can be obtained if there is a legal action. The CRC will keep documentation of their findings and the actions they take.
William M. LovingQ. Isn’t it a problem for us if people tell us there has been sexual harassment, but choose to proceed informally (i.e. reject using Guideline M.5. Part A or M.5. Part B)?
We have an obligation not to discourage people from pursuing any part of this Guideline, but RCers may refuse to use our Guideline and take or not take whatever action they wish for themselves.
However, even if the RCer is proceeding informally, if information about sexual harassment comes to the attention of the Committee or RRP, the RC Community has to appropriately address the concern. We can’t learn of sexual harassment and ignore it just because the person who experienced it doesn’t want to pursue it formally. We don’t have to involve them, but we have to address it.
Q. This type of misconduct often involves “power dynamics” (age, race, sex, etc.). How do we address these power dynamics in RC? For example, how would a younger person feel empowered to report something they believed was harassment if most of the leadership is much older?
Our first step is informing people across the RC Communities about the existence and content of the Guidelines in fundamentals and other classes. It is posted to our website along with the other Guidelines. We have a webpage of information and resources about the Guideline here.
We will also want to increase the amount of work we do in the Communities on sex and Guideline M.5. Part A and M.5. Part B. We want to create the atmosphere that we want to hear about sexual misconduct if it is occurring, that we have no tolerance for it in RC. All leaders will want to address these issues in our classes and workshops, including those for younger RCers.
Q. How do you judge that a person found to have engaged in sexual misconduct is now ready to re-integrate into the RC Community?
Anyone found to have engaged in sexual misconduct who remains in RC will be required to have many sessions on the distress recordings that led to these behaviors. They will be required to commit to not engage in such behavior or other sexual misconduct in the future. Some of their sessions with be with Reference Persons, who can help ensure that their sessions are on track to address these distress recordings. As they discharge it will become easier for them to resist the pull of the distress recordings.
If and when the person requests that restrictions on their participation in RC be removed, we will want to know that they had not engaged in these behaviors or other sexual misconduct since the complaint. We will want an assurance from them that they feel confident that they can participate fully in RC without acting out sexual misconduct. A discussion about this with their Reference Persons and a member of the CRC from their constituency would be important.
Once these discussions have happened, and we have these assurances, the ARP and RRP involved (in consultation with the CRC) will make the final judgment about their resuming full participation in RC.
Q. What will we do if a person does the same thing again after we have addressed it once? Could we be accused of condoning these behaviors by allowing them to stay in or return to RC?
We will again look into the complaint, following our M.5. process. If we again find sexual misconduct, we will take into account that this happened before, and that their assertions and our judgment that they would not act out those distresses again was mistaken. We should consider whether they violated the terms of the resolution of the first complaint and whether they should be removed from the Community because they are unable to refrain from acts of sexual misconduct. But regardless of what we could be accused of; we will stay true to our understandings and our practices. We will not assume that because someone has engaged in sexual misconduct once, or twice, or more, that they should be forever removed from RC or that their behavior cannot change with discharge and referencing.
Gabriel MolinaQ. In my early years in RC, I had big infatuations with Co-Counselors and it was very useful to fall in love and work openly on the crush. That doesn’t seem possible now.
Nothing in our Guidelines stops (or could stop) people from “falling in love” and working on crushes in RC. We don’t want those feelings to have to go underground. Working on them openly is important for our relationships and our re-emergence. We do want to create the conditions where all people will feel thought about and included in this work.
We ask people to discharge on these feelings rather than act on them. We ask that people not work on crushes and falling in love with the RCer who is the object of their feelings. And we ask that they work on early distresses connected to the infatuation, not just on the current feelings.
To keep this work happening, we should address these topics in our classes. We can welcome people to work on those feelings, telling them that whatever feelings they have are fine and make sense to look at in their sessions, along with the early roots of the feelings. We will want to tell RCers they don’t have to participate in classes on this topic—they might choose not to face the restimulations at this time.
The article “Close Meaningful Relationships with People, and the RC No-Socializing Agreement” addresses many of these issues.
Q. What will we do in a jurisdiction where the form of sexual misconduct concerned about is considered criminal activity? What protection do we have for the actions we take?
We should note first that we have a very broad definition of sexual misconduct in RC, and most of those behaviors are not criminal activity. If there is sexual misconduct in the RC Community that is also criminal, it will be up to the person making the complaint to determine whether they pursue criminal charges. Following our Guideline, we will make our own determination about whether sexual misconduct has occurred and what actions we take to address it, separate from any criminal process. If criminal charges are pursued, the Reference Persons and members of the CRC could be questioned, and any written materials subpoenaed, as part of the criminal process.
Q. The culture in my country is very different from that in the Global North and much of what is considered sexual misconduct in the Guideline is not considered sexual misconduct in my country. How do I think about that in applying the Guideline?
One important thing about the Guideline is that it points our attention to the issue of sexual exploitation, sex, and oppression. We want all of our Communities to teach about the Guideline and sexual misconduct, and about sexism, male domination, sexual exploitation, feelings of victimization, and other related topics. We want to give people opportunities to discharge about the Guideline and ask questions about it. There may be upset that RC thinks that conduct we have considered acceptable in our relationships is actually oppressive, and even sexual misconduct. We want those upsets to be expressed and the discharge work to happen.
What is considered sexual misconduct may well vary somewhat depending on culture, race, class, and so on. The way the Guideline is written, those factors can be considered in applying the Guideline. Local Reference People are key in the process, the person bringing the complaint gets to choose a Reference Person to have on the CRC, and these issues should be considered in making the other appointments to the CRC. Our leaders are trained in how to implement the Guideline without being oppressive to any group.
The more we can do the work on these topics in our Communities, the fewer incidents of sexual misconduct there will be.
Q. How does RC think about what is called a “survivor-centered approach” outside of RC? Many of us have been trained or done this work outside of RC and the RC approach is very different.
We are committed to thinking about both people involved in any complaint. Both are hurt and have distresses, both are fully human. One person’s patterns were acted out and caused distress to the other, and we will address the consequences of that misconduct. But we know that with discharge and referencing, distresses can resolve and conduct can change. And we know that we can recover from any distress. We take a strong stand against punishing or vilifying the person who violated the Guideline.
Co-Counselors who have formed their framework for dealing with sexual misconduct outside of RC might struggle with our process. Our framework is clearly different, and that was intentional. We need to be prepared for people to have feelings about our differences and make opportunities for them to discharge about their concerns and raise them with us.
It can be helpful for us to look into and address a complaint quickly, so that the person bringing the complaint is heard and can see that we take their complaint seriously. We want the complainant to have confidence in our process and our responding quickly, including setting up counseling for them. That and including their choice of Reference Person on the CRC all seemed to help them develop confidence in our M.5. Part B process.
Diane Shisk, ChileQ. What have we learned from our first complaints?
-
It’s useful to listen to the person raising the concern immediately and fully, and to schedule the interviews quickly. It’s reassuring to the complainant that we are taking their complaint seriously. It also seems to create the conditions for them to discharge well.
-
Get all the facts in the interview. Ask each person for details.
-
It is best to have both local leaders (who have some relationship with the individuals involved) and a member of the CRC (who don’t have a personal relationship with the individual and who have more knowledge about Guideline M.5.) conduct the interviews together.
-
Everyone involved needs to discharge on the information that comes to light and our feelings about the individuals involved. We all have been hurt in this area and need to clear out any assumptions, biases, and restimulations.
-
Making a complaint under M.5. may bring up a lot of feelings for the person raising the concern and it is good to help organize extra counseling quickly for both individuals.
-
We had to think about not overextending the members of the CRC, expecting that they will be handling multiple complaints in a year. Hopefully the local Reference Persons will only have the one!
-
It was useful to check in with the support person the complainant had accompany them to the interview. They needed to discharge, talk about the situation, and be able to ask questions. We decided that the ARP/RRP may want to pull together the Co-Counselors of the RCers involved from time to time to counsel them about the situation and check in with them. We need to help a Co-Counselor be completely for a person, without “taking sides” against anyone else.
-
It seems that as a Community we don’t have enough ongoing opportunities to discharge for people with active addictions to sex and pornography, and who have predatory patterns.
-
We needed to discharge to face that one of the parties was lying and to think well about how to handle that.
Q. How will a complaint proceed if the person is saying sexual misconduct has occurred but wants to proceed informally?
If an RCer informs an RC leader that they believe they experienced sexual misconduct and wants to proceed informally, we still want the leader to inform their ARP and RRP (who notify the CRC) immediately about the complaint. We want the leader and a Reference Person to meet with the RCer as is laid out in the first part of the Guide for a Part A or Part B complaint. They will review Guideline M.5., the Flow Chart, and the three options available with the RCer. They should inquire about what happened, when the actions occurred, whether the perceived sexual misconduct is serious or ongoing, and how the RCer wants to proceed. We (the RC Community) want to be sure the decision to proceed informally is an informed decision. They will ask if the person raising the concern believes the conduct is likely to happen again, and why or why not.
If the RCer does not want to proceed under M.5. (i.e. wants to proceed informally or not at all) the RC Community still wants to know the facts of their complaint. If after hearing their complaint, we are concerned that sexual misconduct might have occurred, we will proceed with our own investigation, regardless of what actions the RCer takes.
If the RCer wants to proceed informally with the assistance of an RC leader, they can choose what leader they want to assist them. That leader can counsel with them, help them think through the situation, meet with the RCer and the person whose actions are complained of (at the request of the RCer), and/or other actions the leader and their Reference Person thinks are appropriate. The RC leader will take these steps in close consultation with their Reference Person. (If it is a teacher or ARP that is closely involved with the RCer—at the RCer’s request—that teacher or ARP will consult with the RRP.) The RRP will stay in contact with the CRC.
In any of these situations, at any point in time, if the RRP or CRC thinks serious harm may be happening or is about to happen, they will immediately intercede to prevent the possibility of misconduct, inform the Co-Counselors that they are not to have contact with one another, and take other measures necessary to prevent harm.
Q. Are we consulting with lawyers about how we are handling any complaints of sexual misconduct?
Yes, we have a legal team that consults closely with Diane.
Q. Is a workshop leader expected to address a concern about sexual misconduct at a workshop during the workshop?
Yes. See Footnote 163, which requires that, "concerns about sexual misconduct at a workshop should be immediately communicated to the workshop leader." The leader is expected to see to it that the initial steps of addressing a concern happen at the workshop, and not be delayed until the workshop is over. The workshop leader can ask RRPs who are attending the workshop to assist and should pass the concern to the RRPs of the people involved after the workshop.
Q. If a complaint comes to an ILRP, do they stay involved throughout the complaint process?
The ILRP should ask the initial questions of the person raising the concern, and then hand that information to the person’s RRP to continue the process. Depending on which option the person decides to pursue, the interview will be handled by the RRP together with the ARP or CRC. The ILRP should be considered to be a member of the CRC.
Q. If two RCers who only know each other through RC are having a sexual relationship, is that sexual misconduct?
If they are adults and have each agreed to the relationship, it is not sexual misconduct but should be referred to their Reference People as a violation of the no-socializing policy.
Q. What is “conduct of a sexual nature?”
Conduct of a sexual nature includes a range of behaviors or actions, since there is a very wide range of activities which are expressions of sexuality or have sexual connotations in our society. Therefore, behavior which may appear relatively innocent (such as joking, innuendoes, flirting and asking someone on a date) can be experienced as sexual misconduct depending on the circumstances.