Editorial: CCSN doesn't need 'sex police' policy

MOST students who attend the Community College of Southern Nevada are old enough to vote. Many have already had one career and are pursuing a new profession. So why shouldn't these adults be trusted when it comes to consensual sex?

Four other community college campuses in the state have policies that discourage romantic liaisons between professors and students. They force professors to disclose such relationships to their supervisors.

CCSN President Richard Moore has wisely balked at instituting a similar policy on his campus. He recognizes that there is strong opposition at CCSN. The Faculty Senate defeated the idea in 1996.

Community College history Professor Gary E. Elliott made a compelling argument against the policy last Friday at a Board of Regents committee meeting in Reno. He said the policy makes the University and Community College System of Nevada "the sex police" and violates the constitutional rights of privacy for individuals.

Defenders of the policy say intimate liaisons between faculty and students can lead to sexual harassment if the relationships go sour. But there are already laws that punish sexual predators. What we don't need is a campus sex register. College bureaucrats have far more pressing educational issues to address.

Elliott was correct to be concerned that confidential information passed on to supervisors could leak out without sanctions against the squealer. And the information could be kept in files for years with no good reason.

There is a big difference between consensual sex and sexual harassment. A relationship between consenting adults shouldn't be confused with that of predator and victim. Unfortunately, some of the folks who oversee higher education in Nevada haven't learned that lesson.

archive