Photo Credit: PeopleImages
Note: This article discusses mandatory reporting in the context of adult app-based users who experience sexual harm facilitated through their platforms. This does not apply to app-based users who are minors. Certain professions are designated as mandatory reporters of child sexual abuse and are held legally responsible for reporting those incidents to law enforcement, and the laws regarding mandatory reporters vary state-by-state. Company sexual assault policy must be familiar with local, state, and federal laws and guidelines regarding reporting child sexual abuse. Furthermore, companies can still play an important part in connecting with the appropriate resources to prevent child endangerment and exploitation on their platforms. Contact the Childhelp National Child Abuse Hotline (1-800-4-A-CHILD) to learn more about the guidance and resources that can be made available to young people in need of help.
Amid a series of sexual assault reports on Tinder that went unanswered by the platform, South Wales police began conversations with parent company Match Group in 2021. Their aim was to both gain access to Tinder’s portal of sexual assault reports and use AI to scan user conversations to identify red flags. We have observed other proposed legislation in the United States and around the globe that would require mandatory reporting by apps to law enforcement and other regulatory bodies in the event of sexual assault against adults. While we understand the importance of legal systems partnering with organizations and communities to protect survivors and increase sexual violence prevention efforts, we believe that mandatory reporting of adult sexual assault harms app-based users.
Survivors can feel a loss of agency and autonomy following sexual assault, and mandatory reporting of adult sexual assault can be an additional victimization because it furthers that loss of agency and autonomy. All survivors should always have the option to make decisions about whether, when, and where to report incidents of abuse. Legislation, rules, or regulations should not take this choice away from survivors. We need our online spaces to empower survivors to move forward in whatever way they choose, and mandatory reporting of adult survivor cases creates unnecessary obstacles in that process. In this blog, we will be focusing on the reasons why we are opposed to legislation that compels app-based companies to share survivor story data without their consent to law enforcement, government agencies, and other regulatory bodies.
Survivor Privacy Must Be a Priority
At the forefront of all our work is the belief that a survivor’s physical and mental well-being must take priority. Some government agencies may want to compel companies to share more information when someone has been removed from an app to assert their appeal. This becomes dangerous for survivors when companies are compelled to share personal and identifying information with outside sources or with the person who harmed the survivor. After a sexual assault, survivors may not choose to come forward for a variety of reasons. Some may feel a fear of retaliation from their attacker, and those fears may be further amplified if the attacker can gauge personal identifying information from their profile, work information, personal network, or even home address (as is the case for rideshare apps). Some may fear judgment or exclusion in their family, friend circle, or community. Some have a negative history with law enforcement, and have serious concerns with interacting with them. This mistrust and fear may also stem from the cultural and historical context of policing practices that cause harm to communities, particularly communities of color. These emotions are all understandable and deserve to be respected.
In the wake of a sexual assault, a survivor might wish to bring their attacker to justice, but they might not. Survivors might just look for the person to not do the behavior again, get an acknowledgement that the harm happened and an apology, or something else entirely. Law enforcement and other governmental entities are not the only avenue where survivors can get these things from. After experiencing an event that left them feeling disempowered, it’s important to allow survivors the power to choose who hears their story and give voice for what they want accountability to look like. If an app-based user wants their reports of sexual misconduct or abuse handled by the company to which they made the report to maintain their privacy, then we owe it to them to follow their wishes.
Investigative Processes are Hindered When They Aren’t on the Survivor’s Terms
Survivors often have different priorities or desires in the aftermath of sexual assault. By compelling reporting, a survivor may be disincentivized to report at all because they will feel a lack of control over what may happen to them next. When a survivor chooses to disclose an incident of sexual assault to a company, they may have the expectation that the company will handle their claim without disclosure to other parties without their consent. If a company is compelled to disclose the survivor’s report to a regulatory body, the survivor does not have a say in who their report gets told to, and this can further feel like a loss of autonomy. This can also re-traumatize survivors and jeopardize an investigation if that regulatory body contacts the survivor without their consent or knowledge that the regulatory body knew about their report.
Additionally, one of the most important factors in any reporting process is ensuring that the survivor is in a space where they can provide the best testimony to their ability. If reports are made directly to law enforcement, it expedites the timeline in reporting. After traumatic events, our brains encode the events differently. Some details may not emerge until weeks after we’ve left that heightened state. Sharing stories without survivor consent, and potentially forcing survivors to tell their story to law enforcement before they’re ready or when they explicitly do not want to, compounds their stress and can lead to reports that are less detailed and harder to prove. Forwarding reports without survivor consent harms not just the survivor, but the effectiveness of a trauma-informed investigation. Pursuing justice through the legal system has also been found to be a retraumatizing process for survivors, particularly when they’re giving their reports to investigators who have not had trauma-informed training. For serious crimes like sexual assault, having a legal landscape that preserves a survivor’s choice to come forward benefits both the survivor and the criminal justice process.
Limiting Reporting Options Makes Repeat Offenses More Likely
There are survivors who feel very strongly about who they do and do not want to report to, including the company, law enforcement, and other government agencies. If they find out that they are not able to have their case handled by the company they report to, it will dissuade them from reporting their assault at all. This increases the risk of the perpetrator enacting the same offense to another user. Leaving reporting to be an “all or nothing” scenario harms present and future survivors, their loved ones, and the company as a whole. If the law is interested in preventing future perpetration, it must be open to the idea that there are multiple avenues to prevention and accountability.
Gender-Based Violence Experts Provide the Greatest Insight to Survivor Safety and Healing
RALIANCE is comprised of gender-based violence experts who have been working in the anti-sexual violence field for decades. Our history in the movement, and our close relationships with those who provide victim services, gives us a unique insight that is valuable to those who wish to amend their sexual violence policy. It is leaders like us who must have a seat at the table when new sexual violence prevention legislation is proposed. Our laws, regulations, and rules cannot act in the best interest of the people if they are not made in conversation with the people they impact the most. We encourage all legislative efforts at the local, state, and federal levels to bring us, anti-sexual assault state coalitions, and/or other survivor-led organizations to the table. When governments, companies, and survivors have a dialogue, we believe they can create legal, work, and cultural environments that prioritize survivor safety and healing.
As our lives become more increasingly online, it is more important than ever that we all stay on the same page about our values. Survivor privacy is paramount. Investigations must be trauma-informed. Expanded reporting options are vital. Collaboration with gender-based violence experts is the key to true progress. When those in political power uphold those values, we will be one step closer to a future safe from sexual violence.
RALIANCE is a trusted adviser for organizations committed to building cultures that are safe, equitable, and respectful. RALIANCE offers unparalleled expertise in serving survivors of sexual harassment, misconduct, and abuse which drives our mission to help organizations across sectors create inclusive environments for all. For more information, please visit www.RALIANCE.org.