Download Facing Campus Sexual Assault And Relationship Violence With Courage A Guide For Institutions And Clinicians On Prevention Support And Healing 1St Edition Helen W Wilson Editor online ebook texxtbook full chapter pdf

Facing Campus Sexual Assault and
Relationship Violence with Courage: A

Guide for Institutions and Clinicians on
Prevention, Support, and Healing 1st
Edition Helen W. Wilson (Editor)
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmeta.com/product/facing-campus-sexual-assault-and-relationship-violen
ce-with-courage-a-guide-for-institutions-and-clinicians-on-prevention-support-and-hea
ling-1st-edition-helen-w-wilson-editor/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
Sexual Violence on Campus Power Conscious Approaches to

Awareness Prevention and Response 1st Edition Christina
Linder
https://ebookmeta.com/product/sexual-violence-on-campus-power-
conscious-approaches-to-awareness-prevention-and-response-1st-
edition-christina-linder/
Sexual Assault Prevention on College Campuses 1st

Edition Matt Gray
https://ebookmeta.com/product/sexual-assault-prevention-on-
college-campuses-1st-edition-matt-gray/
Healing Smoothies for Cancer Nutrition Support for

Prevention and Recovery 1st Edition Chace
https://ebookmeta.com/product/healing-smoothies-for-cancer-
nutrition-support-for-prevention-and-recovery-1st-edition-chace/
Campus Sexual Violence A State of Institutionalized

Sexual Terrorism 1st Edition Sarah Prior Brooke De Heer
https://ebookmeta.com/product/campus-sexual-violence-a-state-of-
institutionalized-sexual-terrorism-1st-edition-sarah-prior-
brooke-de-heer/
Compulsive Sexual Behaviours A Psycho Sexual Treatment
Guide for Clinicians 1st Edition Silva Neves
https://ebookmeta.com/product/compulsive-sexual-behaviours-a-
psycho-sexual-treatment-guide-for-clinicians-1st-edition-silva-
neves/
Intersectionality in Action A Guide for Faculty and

Campus Leaders for Creating Inclusive Classrooms and
Institutions 1st Edition Peter Felten
https://ebookmeta.com/product/intersectionality-in-action-a-
guide-for-faculty-and-campus-leaders-for-creating-inclusive-
classrooms-and-institutions-1st-edition-peter-felten/
Spiritual Healing from Sexual Violence: An

Intersectional Guide 1st Edition Debra Meyers (Editor)
https://ebookmeta.com/product/spiritual-healing-from-sexual-
violence-an-intersectional-guide-1st-edition-debra-meyers-editor/
Cambridge IGCSE and O Level History Workbook 2C - Depth

Study: the United States, 1919-41 2nd Edition Benjamin
Harrison
https://ebookmeta.com/product/cambridge-igcse-and-o-level-
history-workbook-2c-depth-study-the-united-states-1919-41-2nd-
edition-benjamin-harrison/
ACT for Anorexia Nervosa A Guide for Clinicians 1st

Edition Rhonda M Merwin Nancy L Zucker Kelly G Wilson
https://ebookmeta.com/product/act-for-anorexia-nervosa-a-guide-
for-clinicians-1st-edition-rhonda-m-merwin-nancy-l-zucker-kelly-
g-wilson/
FACING
E
motional distress, difÿculty focusing on academic work, disruption of sleep,
Facing Campus Sexual Assault and Relationship Violence With Courage

withdrawal from social activities, excessive substance use, self-harming
behaviors—these are some of the numerous and serious consequences of
campus sexual assault and intimate partner violence. Campus
Sexual
This new volume leverages the wisdom of psychiatry, college mental health,
and higher education to develop a holistic approach to addressing sexual and
relationship violence on campuses.
Chapters weave the latest science with real-world knowledge and practical
applications that address prevention strategies from early childhood through the Assault
and
collegiate and graduate level; systems of response and care, including both insti-
tutional responses and trauma-informed models of care; clinical interventions
for both victims and perpetrators; and support for students from marginalized
communities, including gender-expansive students and students of color.
This book also offers a candid assessment of the systems of oppression that Relationship
Violence
underpin sexual and relationship violence—White supremacy, patriarchy, and ho-
mophobia among them—calling on institutions of higher education and mental
health professionals alike to acknowledge and dismantle these systems and pro-
viding them with the foundation needed to do so.
  
With
Helen W. Wilson, Ph.D. (she/her) is a clinical associate professor of psychiatry
and behavioral sciences at Stanford University School of Medicine and was the
COURAGE
founding director of the Stanford Conÿdential Support Team, a campus service
devoted to supporting students affected by sexual and relationship violence. She
is a clinical psychologist dedicated to addressing the life span effects of violence
through clinical service, education, and research and to dismantling systems of
oppression through this work.
A Guide for
Christina T. Khan, M.D., Ph.D. (she/her/ella) is a pediatric and adult psychiatrist Institutions and
and clinical associate professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Stan-
ford University School of Medicine. She founded and directs THRIVE, the mental
Clinicians on
health division of Stanford’s LGBTQ+ Health Program, which approaches holistic
wellness from a minority stress and anti-oppression framework. She currently
Prevention,
serves as president of the Association of Women Psychiatrists and is committed Support,
Wilson • Khan
to advancing gender equity across the life span.

and Healing
EDITED BY
Helen W. Wilson, Ph.D.
Cover image by Forrest L. Glick. Christina T. Khan, M.D., Ph.D.
Facing Campus Sexual Assault
and Relationship Violence
With Courage
A Guide for Institutions and Clinicians on

Prevention, Support, and Healing
Facing Campus Sexual Assault
and Relationship Violence
With Courage
A Guide for Institutions and Clinicians on

Prevention, Support, and Healing
Edited by
Christina T. Khan, M.D., Ph.D.
Washington, DC
London, England
Note: The authors have worked to ensure that all information in this book is accurate at the
time of publication and consistent with general psychiatric and medical standards and that in-
formation concerning drug dosages, schedules, and routes of administration is accurate at the
time of publication and consistent with standards set by the U.S. Food and Drug Administra-
tion and the general medical community. As medical research and practice continue to ad-
vance, however, therapeutic standards may change. Moreover, specific situations may require
a specific therapeutic response not included in this book. For these reasons and because human
and mechanical errors sometimes occur, we recommend that readers follow the advice of phy-
sicians directly involved in their care or the care of a member of their family.
Books published by American Psychiatric Association Publishing represent the findings, con-
clusions, and views of the individual authors and do not necessarily represent the policies and
opinions of American Psychiatric Association Publishing or the American Psychiatric Associ-
ation.
If you wish to buy 50 or more copies of the same title, please go to www.appi.org/specialdis-
counts for more information.
Copyright © 2023 American Psychiatric Association Publishing
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
First Edition
Manufactured in the United States of America on acid-free paper
27 26 25 24 23 5 4 3 2 1
American Psychiatric Association Publishing
800 Maine Avenue SW, Suite 900
Washington, DC 20024-2812
www.appi.org
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Wilson, Helen W., editor. | Khan, Christina, editor. | American Psychiatric Association
Publishing, issuing body.
Title: Facing campus sexual assault and relationship violence with courage : a guide for insti-
tutions and clinicians on prevention, support, and healing / edited by Helen W. Wilson,
Christina Khan.
Description: First edition. | Washington, DC : American Psychiatric Association Publishing,
[2023] | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2022034465 (print) | LCCN 2022034466 (ebook) | ISBN
9781615374434 (paperback ; alk. paper) | ISBN 9781615374441 (ebook)
Subjects: MESH: Stress Disorders, Traumatic—therapy | Sex Offenses—prevention & con-
trol | School Mental Health Services—standards | Crisis Intervention—methods | Stu-
dents—psychology | Adolescent | Young Adult
Classification: LCC HV6556 (print) | LCC HV6556 (ebook) | NLM WM 172.5 | DDC
362.8830835—dc23/eng/20220826
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2022034465
LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2022034466
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

A CIP record is available from the British Library.
Contents
Positioning the Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ix

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xvii
Part I
Prevention
1 It’s Never Too Early, It’s Never Too Late: Fostering

Sexual Citizenship in Humans of All Ages . . . . . . . . . 3
2 Prevention in Primary Education: Effective

School-Based Interventions for Middle and
High School Students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Samantha Ludin, Ph.D., M.Ed.
Katrina Debnam, Ph.D., M.P.H.
3 Prevention at the University Level: Effective

Interventions for College and Graduate Students . . 39
Carley J. Flanery, M.P.H., M.S.W.
Part II
Systems of Response and Care
4 Navigating Through Institutional Responses

Following Sexual Violence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Lauren Schoenthaler, J.D.
5 Trauma-Informed Campus Care . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Melissa Murphy-Pucillo, LCSW, M.P.H.
Grace Poon Ghaffari, M.A.
Part III
Clinical Intervention
6 State of the Evidence for Treatment of Survivors

of Campus Sexual Assault. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Stacy L. Lin, Ph.D.
7 Unique Considerations for Graduate Students . . . 117

Amy Alexander, M.D.
Angela Esquivel Hawkins, M.A.
Vanika Chawla, M.D.
8 Effective Interventions for Perpetrators . . . . . . . . . 141

Raina V. Lamade, Ph.D.
Jackson Tay Bosley, Psy.D.
Courtney Dwyer, M.A.
Part IV
Embracing Student Differences
and Cultural Wealth
9 Queer Communities and Patriarchal Violence:

Healing Through Interpersonal, Cultural, and
Systemic Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
Marissa Floro, Ph.D.
Stephanie N. Wong, Ph.D.
10 Trans and Gender-Expansive Students’

Experience: Rethinking Gender-Based Violence. . . 185
Elliot Ruggles, LICSW, Ph.D.
Deb Schneider, LCSW, PPSC
11 Centering the Cultural Wealth of Survivors of
Color in Healing and Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
Grace Poon Ghaffari, M.A.
Tolulope A. Taiwo, M.S.
Allison L. Thompson, Ph.D.
12 Culturally Specific Approaches to Sexual Assault

and Intimate Partner Violence Prevention
and Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
Pierre R. Berastain, M.Div.
Rose Poyau, LMHC
13 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243
Positioning the
Authors
Amy Alexander, M.D. (she/her) is a clinical assistant professor in the Depart-
ment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Stanford University. She writes
from multiple perspectives: as a heterosexual, cisgender, abled daughter of im-
migrants; as a psychiatrist specializing in college mental health and president of
the Association for College Psychiatry (AFCP); as a clinician in the Stanford
Mental Health for Asians Research and Treatment (SMHART) Clinic; and as an
advocate for women as president-elect of the Association of Women Psychia-
trists (AWP).
Pierre R. Berastain, M.Div., is an immigrant survivor of sexual violence and a

childhood witness of family violence who has worked with culturally specific
communities throughout the United States; he was the director of the Office of
Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (OSAPR) at Harvard University and is
the cofounder of Latinos United for Peace and Equity, a culturally specific na-
tional organization working at the intersection of violence prevention, race, and
culture. He currently serves as the chief strategy & operations officer for the Dis-
trict Alliance for Safe Housing, the largest safe housing provider for survivors of
domestic and sexual violence in the District of Columbia–Maryland–Virginia
(DMV) region. He is also a doctoral candidate in public health leadership and
management at the University of North Carolina.
Jackson Tay Bosley, Psy.D. (he/him) is a 70-year-old, White, cisgender male

who grew up in Asia. He has a history of social activism, living in Buddhist mo-
nastic environments and using psychological science to counter societal injus-
tices. Although officially retired, he still provides direct services as a part-time
clinician seeing students and professors who have been identified by the Title IX
process as having transgressed sexual boundaries. His previous work in the field
of sexual violence centered on creating and operating specialized treatment pro-
grams, providing supervision and training for clinicians, and testifying as a foren-
sic psychologist in court cases involving sexual violence. His previous teaching
ix
x Facing Campus Sexual Assault and Relationship Violence With Courage
experience focused on undergraduate- and graduate-level classes in the psychol-

ogy and criminal justice departments, usually focused on assessing and treating
adults who have engaged in sexual violence.
Vanika Chawla, M.D. (she/her) is a second-generation South Asian Canadian,

heterosexual, able-bodied, cisgender female. She completed her psychiatry resi-
dency at the University of Toronto and medical school at the University of Cal-
gary. She completed a fellowship in student mental health in the Department of
Psychiatry at Stanford University. Throughout her training, she has sought out
clinical and learning opportunities for furthering diversity, equity, and inclusion
in medicine and working with underserved and underrepresented populations.
Her personal and professional experiences affect her contributions to this book.
Katrina Debnam, Ph.D., M.P.H (she/her) is an assistant professor with joint

appointments in the School of Nursing and School of Education and Human
Development at the University of Virginia. Her scholarship stems from her com-
mitment to improving health outcomes for historically underserved adolescents
through community-based violence prevention strategies. As a cisgender Black
woman, she is particularly attuned to the ways structural systems contribute to
relationship violence experienced by young women of color. Her work is
grounded in a desire to counter decades of research that attributes elevated vio-
lence victimization rates among women of color to their own inadequacies and
failures.
Courtney Dwyer, M.A. (she/her) is a graduate of the clinical psychology pro-

gram at the University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth, holding additional certifi-
cation as a clinical trauma and resilience practitioner. In the early phases of her
career, she has accrued more than 5 years of experience in providing clinical ser-
vices to youth and families within disadvantaged and underrepresented commu-
nities, focusing on developmental and psychosocial implications for behavior.
She is a White, cisgender female who strives to advocate for equity across all areas
of marginalization.
Carley J. Flanery, M.P.H, MSW (she/her) is the director of prevention educ-

ation for students in the Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Education
(SHARE) Title IX Office at Stanford University, where she continues the pro-
fessional passion she discovered as a first-generation college student peer educa-
tor. Growing up in a working-class community in rural northern Wisconsin, her
observations of multiple forms of violence disproportionately affecting Indige-
nous communities influenced her understanding of historical trauma and inter-
Positioning the Authors xi
sectionality and her path in public health education. She is a White, able-bodied,
cisgender woman survivor who believes in the power of restorative and transfor-
mative justice.
Marissa Floro, Ph.D. (she/her) is an adjunct professor at the University of San

Francisco and a program manager and course instructor through Stanford Uni-
versity’s Weiland Health Initiative, a campus service committed to providing
clinical and advocacy services to queer, trans, and nonbinary students and com-
munities. She is a counseling psychologist who provides clinical services, psycho-
educational materials, advocacy work, training, and curricula rooted in feminist
and liberation work. As a queer mixed Asian femme, her experiences and work
within and for the communities affected by White supremacy, colonialism, and
capitalism deeply affect her contributions to this book, her work, and her life.
Grace Poon Ghaffari, M.A. (she/her) is a Chinese American woman, mother,

and survivor of relationship abuse who is also cisgender, heterosexual, able-
bodied, and a Christian. Because Grace’s identities are a stratification of systemic
privilege and oppression, she believes that all violence is interconnected and so-
cially constructed within systems of power and oppression. As a result, she works
as a higher education scholar practitioner who specializes in the prevention of
sexual and relationship violence and harassment and the promotion of caring re-
lationships and antiracist behaviors. Grace also facilitates trauma-informed yoga
and believes that healing must be intersectional and intertwined with cultural
wealth. Last, as a Chinese American woman who has experienced and continues
to experience racist misogyny, she is passionate about transforming systems to
better support survivors of color.
Angela Esquivel Hawkins, M.A. (she/her) is a Mexican American, queer, cis-

gender woman, wife, educator, musician, and survivor of sexual and domestic
violence. She is a higher education administrator with more than 15 years of ex-
perience in crisis management, public speaking, event planning, teaching, and ac-
tivism. She currently serves as the associate director of educational programs in
the Office of the Vice Provost for Graduate Education (VPGE) at Stanford Uni-
versity. Angela graduated magna cum laude with a bachelor of arts degree in music
from the University of Southern California and holds a master of arts degree in
higher education from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. She currently lives
in Northern California with her wife, two cats, and two dogs. Additionally, Angela
teaches private voice lessons, serves as a board director of the University of Mich-
igan LGBTQ Alumni Association, is an appointed delegate for the California
Democratic Party, and volunteers with the Family and Children Services of Sili-
xii Facing Campus Sexual Assault and Relationship Violence With Courage
con Valley’s LGBT Speaker’s Bureau, educating the public about how to be af-
firming, supportive allies to LGBTQ+ youth.
Christina T. Khan, M.D., Ph.D. (she/her/ella) is a second-generation Guya-

nese American scholar, mother, daughter, sister, partner, dancer, and friend. She
brings to this work more than 20 years of experience in higher education and
health care prevention programming for special population groups. She is a pe-
diatric and adult psychiatrist and clinical associate professor of psychiatry and
behavioral sciences at Stanford University School of Medicine. She founded and
directs THRIVE, the mental health division of Stanford’s LGBTQ+ Health Pro-
gram, which approaches wholistic wellness from a minority stress and anti-
oppression framework. Her work focuses on building capacity for mental health
and resilience in vulnerable and marginalized communities, and she has worked
in diverse settings, from Peru to Zimbabwe, on issues of interpersonal violence
and trauma. She attributes her passion for social justice and desire to level ineq-
uities to her parents’ historical legacy as descendants of indentured servants; de-
spite oppressive practices, they were able to create the conditions that afford her
many privileges today. She currently serves as president of the Association of
Women Psychiatrists and is committed to advancing gender equity across the
life span.
Raina V. Lamade, Ph.D. (she/her) is an assistant professor of psychology at the

University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth, and a clinical and forensic psycholo-
gist. As a native New Yorker, she was educated in the New York City public
school system up to and including college and has appreciated the opportunity
to grow up with individuals with different backgrounds and perspectives. She is
a cisgender female of European and Middle Eastern heritage. As a descendant of
survivors of the Armenian genocide and, more immediately, Nazi-occupied Eu-
rope, she is committed to equity, social justice, service, and healing. She works
with veterans; disenfranchised populations, including those in the criminal jus-
tice system; survivors of different types of trauma (e.g., war, sexual, refugee); and
individuals who have perpetrated violence and trauma.
Stacy L. Lin, Ph.D. (she/her) is a clinical assistant professor in the Department

of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Stanford University and a former staff
psychologist in the Stanford Confidential Support Team, which serves students
who have been affected by sexual, relationship, and gender-based violence. She is
a cisgender, heterosexual, able-bodied second-generation Taiwanese American
woman and a Bay Area native raised in the Taiwanese immigrant community.
She specializes in the intersection of identity, complex trauma, and body, and her
Positioning the Authors xiii
work is grounded in the value of decolonizing therapy in order to improve access

to culturally sensitive mental health care for individuals in underserved commu-
nities and to advocate for providers of marginalized identities in the field of clin-
ical psychology.
Samantha Ludin, Ph.D., M.Ed. (she/her) is a White, Jewish, cisgender woman

whose clinical and academic work focuses on the intersection of sexual health,
consent-oriented education, and mental health. She is a clinical assistant profes-
sor in the Stanford University School of Medicine’s Department of Psychiatry
and Behavioral Sciences and also sees clients in private practice in the Bay Area.
She specializes in providing culturally responsive, evidence-based psychothera-
peutic interventions for a wide variety of concerns, including romantic and sexual
health, distress within family systems, and trauma and relational violence. As a
person with significant privilege across many domains, she is dedicated to the in-
ternal and systemic work of antiracism and decolonization within her clinical and
research practice.
Melissa Murphy-Pucillo, LCSW, M.P.H (she/her) is a licensed clinical social

worker with more than 20 years of experience counseling those affected by
trauma. Until recently, she worked as the clinical services program manager at
Stanford University’s Confidential Support Team, where she specialized in help-
ing students navigate systems and resources in the aftermath of trauma and co-
led trauma-informed training efforts. Melissa is passionate about systems change
and recently pivoted back into public health as a senior health program planner
at the San Francisco Department of Public Health. In this capacity, she helps lead
racial equity efforts and is focused on improving systems and services for the
city’s most marginalized moms, babies, and youth. As a White, straight, cisgender
woman, she is dedicated to using her privileged identities to effect change.
Rose Poyau, LMHC, is a licensed mental health clinician. Born in France to Hai-
tian parents, she brings a multicultural lens to working with survivors of trauma.
Rose has worked as a children’s therapist for youth who experienced sexual as-
sault, dating and domestic violence, stalking, and/or sexual harassment. She has
facilitated support groups for survivors of interpersonal harm in community set-
tings and higher education. Rose worked as the case manager at Harvard’s Office
of Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (OSAPR) and is currently the direc-
tor of advocacy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Elliot Ruggles, LICSW, Ph.D. (he/they) holds a Ph.D. in human sexuality

studies and a master’s degree in social work and has been teaching, providing
xiv Facing Campus Sexual Assault and Relationship Violence With Courage
therapy, and conducting research in the fields of social work and sexuality for
15 years. He currently serves to coordinate prevention and education initiatives
addressing sexual violence at the University of Vermont and most recently served
as a confidential advocate at Brown University for survivors of sexual, gender-
based, and relationship harm as well as overseeing violence prevention initiatives.
He is descended from working-class Irish and Italian immigrants and colonial
settlers to North America. As a queer, transgender, polyamorous, and neurodi-
vergent person and a childhood sexual abuse survivor, their work is rooted in
social theory and anti-oppression principles, and they are a fierce advocate for
queer and trans people, striving for antiracist practice.
Deb Schneider, LCSW, PPSC (she/they) is a master’s-level clinician and pro-

gram manager at the Weiland Health Initiative, an endowment-funded program
at Stanford University committed to providing clinical and advocacy services to
queer, trans, and nonbinary students and communities. Their clinical work is
based in trauma-informed methods, is heavily influenced by narrative therapy the-
ory and practice, and centers on illuminating strengths and agency while decolo-
nizing mental health and clinical practices. As a White, queer, and genderqueer
anti-Zionist Jew, Deb is deeply invested in unlearning and deconditioning in-
ternalized oppressive structures, systems, and identities and in creating liberation
for all.
Lauren Schoenthaler, J.D. (she/her) is a senior university counsel at Stanford

University and, from 2016 to 2021, served as senior associate vice provost of in-
stitutional equity and access overseeing Stanford’s offices that work to prevent
and respond to instances of harassment or discrimination. She was on the Amer-
ican Bar Association’s Task Force on Campus Sexual Misconduct and is a fre-
quent speaker on sexual harassment and copyright matters for organizations such
as the National Association of College and University Attorneys and the Ameri-
can Council on Education. As the mother of two young adult sons, she often
speaks to youth organizations about the development of sexual citizenship, up-
standing principles, and what to expect at college.
Tolulope A. Taiwo, M.S. (she/they) is the assistant director for Access Pro-
grams at the University of Puget Sound and a doctoral candidate at Azusa Pacific
University. She is also a Black queer femme and a child of Nigerian immigrants.
She strongly believes in so much, but she especially believes in 1) the collective
power of community and 2) Black womxn’s worldmaking and the imagining of
a planet free of, as bell hooks said, the “imperialist White supremacist capitalist
patriarchy.”
Positioning the Authors xv
Allison L. Thompson, Ph.D. (she/her) is a clinical professor in the Stanford

University School of Medicine’s Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sci-
ences. A clinical psychologist with nearly 20 years of experience, she specializes
in treating patients with trauma history and in providing culturally competent
care to patients from traditionally underserved communities. A cisgender Black
woman, Allison ultimately is committed to making mental health care more ac-
ceptable and accessible to people of color and other historically underserved
communities. In addition to her clinical work, she is involved in administration
and teaching in an American Psychiatric Association–accredited doctoral pro-
gram, through which she strives to make the field of clinical psychology more di-
verse, inclusive, and welcoming.
Helen W. Wilson, Ph.D. (she/her) is a clinical associate professor of psychiatry

and behavioral sciences at Stanford University and was the founding director of
the Stanford Confidential Support Team, a campus service devoted to support-
ing students affected by sexual and relationship violence. The perspective she
brings to this book is shaped by nearly 20 years of work as a clinical psychologist
engaged in research, teaching, and clinical service to address the life span effects
of trauma and violence on diverse individuals and communities. She has selected,
edited, and contributed to writing the work included in this book as a White, cis-
gender, able-bodied woman and mother of twins. Recognizing the privilege at-
tached to these identities and social positions, she endeavors in her work to
challenge oppressive systems, policies, and practices and to contribute to the sys-
temic transformation necessary for healing on individual and collective levels.
Stephanie N. Wong, Ph.D. (she/her) is a licensed counseling psychologist at

the VA Palo Alto Health Care System, adjunct professor at New York University,
and founder of Psych for the People, a private practice focused on the provision
of evidence-based and culturally responsive psychotherapy and education. Her
research and clinical experiences center on trauma-informed care, body image,
and intersectional identity development in therapy, research, teaching, and advo-
cacy with diverse communities. Her work focuses on the provision of accessible
treatments for complex trauma in marginalized populations, particularly within
veteran, Asian, and Asian American Pacific Islander communities. This work is
grounded in a commitment to actively assessing and challenging the impact of
White supremacy and colonization and to upholding antiracist and feminist prac-
tices in therapy and teaching spaces. Her passion for social justice and advocacy
work within the field of sexual and relationship violence are shaped significantly
by her experiences in her identities as a cisgender heterosexual third-generation
Asian American woman.
Introduction
Campus sexual and relationship violence (SRV) has re-

ceived a great deal of political and media attention in recent years, although it is
a long-standing problem. Rates of self-reported sexual violence have remained
fairly consistent over at least the past two decades that these data have been sys-
tematically gathered (McCauley and Casler 2015) and likely since the 1960s
(Adams-Curtis and Forbes 2004). Accurate estimation of the number of stu-
dents affected is not straightforward, and estimated rates vary depending on sam-
ple characteristics, definitions of assault, survey modality, and response rates. In
surveys using comprehensive definitions that include attempted and completed
incidents involving both nonpenetration and penetration, approximately 20%–
25% of female-identified (hereafter referred to as female) students and 5%–10%
of male-identified (hereafter referred to as male) students report being victims of
sexual assault (Banyard et al. 2007; Cantor et al. 2015; Krebs et al. 2007). Rates
of college sexual assault reported by males who identify as gay or bisexual are sim-
ilar to rates reported by cisgender college women, and bisexual women report the
highest rates among cisgender women. Students who identify as trans, gender-
queer, gender nonconforming, questioning, or nonbinary (hereafter referred to as
gender-expansive) report rates of sexual assault similar to or even higher than those
of cisgender women. A straightforward estimate, such as the often-cited statistic
“1 in 5 college women,” is overly simplistic given that findings from the Associa-
tion of American Universities (AAU) Campus Climate Survey on Sexual Assault
and Misconduct (Cantor et al. 2020) showed that rates of assault varied consid-
erably across and within the 32 institutions surveyed. In this book, we define sex-
ual assault or violence as a broad spectrum of experiences involving unwanted,
nonconsensual, and/or coerced sexual interactions, including verbal and psycho-
logical coercion or domination. Official legal and university policy definitions are
often more narrow, involving the use of physical force or incapacitation. How-
ever, we consider subtler forms of interpersonal violence, such as psychological
coercion and use of social status or power. Indeed, experiences that do not clearly
involve physical force or capacitation are common among university students.
xvii
xviii Facing Campus Sexual Assault and Relationship Violence With Courage
Less attention has been directed to intimate partner violence and stalking on
university campuses. However, these occurrences are also commonly a part of
the student experience. In the 2019 AAU survey (Cantor et al. 2020), 10% of all
students surveyed endorsed experiences of physical or psychological abuse from
an intimate partner. Notably, rates were highest for trans and gender-expansive
undergraduates (21.5%), followed by cisgender undergraduate women (14%).
Approximately 6% of students reported experiences of stalking since beginning
college, typically by another student. Once again, undergraduate trans and gender-
diverse students reported the highest rates of stalking, at 15%, followed by un-
dergraduate cisgender women at 10%. In this book, we consider intimate partner
violence to encompass a broad range of physical, sexual, verbal, psychological, emo-
tional, financial, and electronic aggression, coercion, and manipulation within an
intimate or sexual relationship. Stalking refers to a pattern of persistent, unwanted
behaviors, such as texts, phone calls, social media posts, and showing up at a resi-
dence, that create fear or distress in the targeted individual. Stalking may or may
not involve a current or former romantic partner.
SRV of all forms can have profound effects on survivors. Nearly all survivors
experience acute distress in the immediate aftermath, entailing intense emotional
distress, unwanted memories of the event, nightmares, difficulty concentrating or
focusing on academic work, sleep problems, mood changes, and feeling jumpy or
on edge. These reactions clearly can interfere with academic engagement and
performance, as well as the social and extracurricular aspects of campus life. In ad-
dition, SRV can result in suicidal ideation, self-harming behaviors, excessive sub-
stance use, risky sexual behaviors, and other risk-taking behaviors as a way of
coping with the intense distress and loss of control associated with these forms of
trauma. However, survivors may present with a range of reactions; some individ-
uals may feel numb and withdraw socially, whereas others may seem to dismiss or
make light of the situation. All of these are typical ways of coping with an other-
wise unbearable experience. Sexual assault and intimate partner violence can also
precipitate clinical disorders, including PTSD, depression, anxiety, and substance
abuse, and can ultimately lead to dropping out of school (Roberts et al. 2016). In
this work, we view SRV as a form of trauma. Our conceptualization of trauma ex-
pands on the American Psychiatric Association (2022) definition of “exposure to
actual or threatened death, serious injury, or sexual violence” (p. 301) to consider
trauma as “an out-of-control, frightening experience that has disconnected us
from all sense of resourcefulness or safety or coping or love” (Brach 2019). In es-
sence, trauma is an experience that challenges one’s sense of safety and control
and disrupts beliefs about oneself, the world, and other people.
This work combines wisdom from psychiatry, college mental health, and
higher education addressing the prevention of, systems response to, and inter-
Introduction xix
vention for campus SRV. Each chapter weaves together current science with best
practice clinical knowledge and recommendations. This work emphasizes a de-
velopmental and ecological systems perspective, considering the contributions
of social context and campus culture.
The book is divided into four parts. Part I, “Prevention,” focuses on preven-
tion of SRV. We begin with prevention in the early years, highlighting shortfalls
in how most young people are socialized around sexuality and guidance on how
professionals, mentors, and parents can cultivate sexual citizenship in new gener-
ations. Part II, “Systems of Response and Care,” focuses on systemic response, in-
cluding a historical look at Title IX policy and an introduction to a model of
trauma-informed campus care. Part III, “Clinical Intervention,” covers interven-
tion, highlighting best practices for treatment and healing. Part IV, “Embracing
Student Differences and Cultural Wealth,” emphasizes support for marginalized
populations affected by SRV for whom more nuanced intervention and systemic
response are required to address the context of power, privilege, and structural
discrimination.
We see campus SRV as being rooted in imbalances of power and systemic
injustice. Violence is a form of oppression that is perpetuated under patriarchal
systems in which greater power, authority, and privilege are associated with male
gender and traits typically considered masculine, such as physical strength and
sexual prowess. On university campuses, status and privilege are often associated
with social roles, such as being an athlete or a member of a Greek organization.
Status, privilege, or advantage can also be associated with certain social categori-
zations, including but not limited to race, indigeneity, gender, gender identity,
sexual orientation, age, (dis)ability, nationality, immigration or refugee status,
language, education, and socioeconomic class. In this book, we view prevention
and intervention through an intersectional lens. Intersectionality was coined by
Kimberlé Crenshaw (1995) to characterize the unique and interactive effects of
racism and sexism on Black women, who have been systematically excluded from
dialogue and legal protections. In her seminal work, Professor Crenshaw wrote,
“the narratives of gender are based on the experiences of white, middle-class
women, and the narratives of race are based on the experiences of black men”
(p. 376). We extend the notion of intersectionality to acknowledge the interde-
pendent systems of disadvantage and oppression that can have multiplicative ef-
fects on persons with multiple minoritized identities. Communities minoritized
because of race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, ability, class, and other social identi-
ties have been left out of dominant narratives about campus SRV (Harris and
Linder 2017). Furthermore, identity-related stereotypes can contribute to the
persistence of violence and serve as barriers to seeking support. Addressing cam-
pus SRV, therefore, requires institutions to center the experiences of the most
xx Facing Campus Sexual Assault and Relationship Violence With Courage
marginalized members of the community. We must acknowledge and dismantle

the fundamental contributions of interacting systems of oppression to campus
violence.
The authors of the chapters within this book discuss how oppressive systems,
including White supremacy, racism, patriarchy, colonialism, homophobia, trans-
phobia, and xenophobia, contribute to the existence and perpetuation of SRV on
university campuses and create barriers to support and healing in the aftermath.
Moreover, SRV is seen as a form of oppression in and of itself that is intertwined
with other forms of oppression in its effects on individual survivors. Inequities of
status and power are fundamental to the existence of SRV, exacerbate the effects
of violence, and make it difficult for students to access resources for support or
institutional response.
Before embarking further on the readings compiled here, we want to correct
two particularly pernicious myths often associated with SRV. First, mainstream
narratives of SRV, and the stories that tend to get attention in the media, most
often involve a White cisgender woman as the victim and a male as the perpetra-
tor (often a person of color). Although reported rates of SRV are highest among
female and trans and gender-expansive students, any student of any gender,
identity, or background can experience or perpetuate it. Heterosexual and cis-
gender men can also experience violence, and women can perpetrate violence.
SRV occurs between individuals of any gender or identity. Male students of any
sexual orientation are likely to underreport SRV because of stigma and a percep-
tion that they will not be believed or taken seriously (Depraetere et al. 2020).
The effects of power imbalance and patriarchy are not limited to male-female
interactions and can show up between individuals of any gender, sexuality, or re-
lationship configuration. Importantly, SRV may be experienced in uniquely
harmful ways by women of color and other students with multiple marginalized
identities because of the compounding effects of interacting systems of violence
and oppression. Furthermore, as described, such experiences of marginalization
and oppression associated with gender, race, and ethnicity can interfere with stu-
dents obtaining or benefiting from support available on campus.
Second, common narratives depicting stranger danger and dramatic, publicly
witnessed assaults fail to capture the most common and pernicious experiences
of violence on university campuses, such as that in intimate relationships or be-
tween a teacher and student. They also leave students ill prepared to navigate the
real risks of SRV or to cope with these experiences. In reality, sexual violence is
most often perpetrated by a person who is known to the victim, either a current
or former romantic partner or someone who is part of the student’s social circle.
Most often, the perpetrator is someone assumed to be safe and trustworthy.
Moreover, sexual violence on university campuses most often occurs in the con-
Introduction xxi
text of campus social events, typically in campus residences and often involving
alcohol or other substances. The physical features of college campuses or sexual
geographies (e.g., sharing small space with roommates, priority residences for
upper-class students, special housing for Greek organizations and for athletes)
can exacerbate power differentials and facilitate sexual violence (Hirsch and
Khan 2020). Trauma in these settings can lead to particularly painful betrayals of
trust and violations of perceived safety. They can derail developmentally normal
exploration of romantic and sexual interactions. They can alienate students from
social networks and communities on campus that are tied to the assault or inhab-
ited by the perpetrator. This situation can also make it difficult for the survivor to
report the experience, and indeed, students are unlikely to ever report experi-
ences of SRV. In the AAU survey, only 15% of students who had experienced SRV
said they contacted a campus program or resource, and half of those who did went
to a confidential counseling center (Cantor et al. 2020). Moreover, these forms
of trauma most often occur outside the public eye, with no witnesses present to
call on for testimony.
Effective prevention of SRV and intervention in its aftermath require under-
standing the historical, social, and political contexts of these occurrences. The au-
thors of Chapter 7, “Unique Considerations for Graduate Students”; Chapter 9,
“Queer Communities and Patriarchal Violence”; Chapter 10, “Trans and Gender-
Expansive Students’ Experience”; Chapter 11, “Centering the Cultural Wealth of
Survivors of Color in Healing and Support”; and Chapter 12, “Culturally Specific
Approaches to Sexual Assault and Intimate Partner Violence Prevention and Re-
sponse,” examine many of the factors contributing to the oppressive environ-
ments in which campus interpersonal violence occurs. When such context is not
appreciated or when a student does not feel safe or protected by the university,
experiences of institutional betrayal can lead to erosion of trust among students
who depend on institutions of higher education (Smith and Freyd 2014). For
many youth and their families, a significant degree of trust is afforded to an insti-
tution when they commit emotional and financial resources and choose to leave
home to attend college. In making this choice, students are placing faith in the in-
stitution to protect their safety and well-being. Systemic failure to provide pro-
tections against violence or to ameliorate its effects is deeply painful to individual
students and can extend to campus communities, contributing to the traumatic
effects of violence (Smith and Freyd 2014).
Colleges and universities have been plagued by a “lack of sufficient courage
to tackle the root causes of sexual violence, and...have not been adequately imag-
inative or forward thinking in our policy and legislative efforts” (Hong 2017,
p. 24). Institutional response has generally focused on punitive, rather than re-
storative, processes and has attempted to work within the same oppressive sys-
xxii Facing Campus Sexual Assault and Relationship Violence With Courage
tems that contribute to the occurrence and effects of violence. Examples of

systemic failure include lack of adequate outreach or support for marginalized
students, such as undocumented and LGBTQ+ students, which often precludes
these students from seeking help. Moreover, administrators, peers, and even sup-
portive professionals often lack understanding of the lived experiences of stu-
dents holding marginalized identities (Harris 2020). Part IV, “Embracing
Student Differences and Cultural Wealth,” delves into considerations involved in
providing healing spaces and restoring justice for student populations that tradi-
tionally have been, and continue to be, overlooked or underserved.
Until recently, SRV was considered to be under the jurisdiction of the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services or the U.S. Department of Justice
and therefore an issue of health, student conduct, or campus safety rather than a
fundamental civil rights issue (Hong 2017). The landmark Title IX of the 1972
U.S. Educational Amendments states, “No person in the United States shall, on
the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be
subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving
Federal financial assistance.” However, it was only in 2011 that guidelines from
the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) (often referred to as the “Dear Col-
league Letter”) interpreted Title IX protections to include freedom from sexual
violence and harassment, which can interfere with a student’s ability to learn and
participate in educational and extracurricular activities. This guidance, which was
signed into law by President Barack Obama with the Campus SaVE Act of 2013,
obligated schools to prevent and respond to campus SRV through consistent, for-
malized, and clearly communicated policies and procedures. All schools that re-
ceive federal funding, which includes most public and private institutions, were
thenceforth required to have a Title IX coordinator on campus and to have a
clearly communicated, systematic process for handling sexual assault charges.
These guidelines also required most university employees to report disclosures
of sexual assault to the Title IX coordinator. The Title IX response to sexual vio-
lence on college campuses recognizes the severe impact that sexual violence can
have on a student’s ability to learn and ensures that universities respond to alle-
gations. It attempts to redress previous concerns that reports of sexual violence
were not treated seriously by universities. However, this legalistic response can
result in survivors experiencing a loss of control and agency in how to address the
experience. Furthermore, it relies on pseudo-legal systems that often reify op-
pressive structures. Most recently, in August 2020, federal legislation from the
DOE created additional legal requirements for university Title IX processes,
many of which place greater onus on the survivor and provide increased rights
and protections for the accused party. This legislation has resulted in criticism
from survivor advocates and in lawsuits from the American Civil Liberties Union
Introduction xxiii
and the National Women’s Law Center. Chapter 4, “Navigating Through Insti-
tutional Responses Following Sexual Violence,” discusses Title IX regulations
and university response systems in more depth.
Across current and historical attempts to prevent and respond to SRV, insti-
tutions have lacked an intersectional perspective to meet the needs of students
with intersecting identities and experiences of oppression. Institutional efforts to
address these concerns have all too often centered the needs and voices of White,
middle-class, cisgender women and have systematically excluded the diverse stu-
dents holding minoritized identities from the benefits of prevention and support.
Ameliorating this situation will require institutions to acknowledge and disman-
tle systems of institutional oppression and patriarchy inherent in higher educa-
tion in the United States, which are ultimately rooted in a colonial college system
that maintains power and privilege associated with being male and White and
that has influence from the top down. As mental health and higher education pro-
fessionals, we hold responsibility for advancing the broad cultural and institu-
tional changes needed to truly address these problems. These changes can take
place through bold, brave actions and advocacy, as well as through seemingly
small interpersonal interactions. Moreover, understanding the historical and so-
ciopolitical context surrounding SRV is critical to supporting students, whose ex-
periences of trauma are embedded within this context.
As aptly stated by LuoLuo Hong (2017), “much of the discourse about sexual
violence focuses on college, giving only cursory attention and acknowledgment
to the 18 or so years of gender-role socialization and cultural training that precede
an individual’s entry into college” (p. 38). Students arrive on college campuses
with preexisting knowledge, beliefs, and values related to sexuality and romantic
relationships (Hirsch and Khan 2020), and, unfortunately, because of reluctance
to hold regular dialogue about healthy sexual and intimate relationships—or
even to acknowledge normal human desire for these relationships—they also ar-
rive with a lack of models for or understanding of what it means to be a sexual
citizen. This history of socialization, or lack thereof, interacts with the physical
and social contexts of college and university campuses to create environments
that enable rampant SRV at these institutions (Hirsch and Khan 2020). For those
of us who understand these contextual conditions, it is no surprise that these
problems continue to exist despite increased awareness and apparent concern. It
will take creative, courageous, intersectional, and developmentally focused solu-
tions if we are to have any hope of reducing these forms of violence for future gen-
erations of students.
Thus, we begin with a focus on prevention before college, beginning in early
childhood, when a foundation for future consensual, nonviolent relationships
can be established (Chapter 1, “It’s Never Too Early, It’s Never Too Late”). In
xxiv Facing Campus Sexual Assault and Relationship Violence With Courage
Chapter 2, “Prevention in Primary Education,” the authors discuss considera-

tions at another critical age in development for middle and high school students.
From there we move on to consider prevention (Chapter 3, “Prevention at the
University Level”) and intervention (Chapter 6, “State of the Evidence for Treat-
ment of Survivors of Campus Sexual Assault”; Chapter 7; and Chapter 8, “Effec-
tive Interventions for Perpetrators”) at the university level as well as for special
populations (Chapters 9–12). The authors of Chapter 4 and Chapter 5 (“Trauma-
Informed Campus Care”) discuss the systems in place to facilitate healing and re-
covery on university campuses. It is our hope that through the information
shared in this book, practitioners can appreciate the developmental, sociocul-
tural, and sociopolitical factors involved in SRV across the student life span and
will triangulate culturally sensitive resources to facilitate healing and recovery for
students of all backgrounds.
References
Adams-Curtis LE, Forbes GB: College women’s experiences of sexual coercion: a review of cul-
tural, perpetrator, victim, and situational variables. Trauma Violence Abuse 5(2):91–122,
2004 15070552
American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th
Edition, Text Revision. Arlington, VA, American Psychiatric Association, 2022
Banyard VL, Ward S, Cohn ES, et al: Unwanted sexual contact on campus: a comparison of
women’s and men’s experiences. Violence Vict 22(1):52–70, 2007 17390563
Brach T: Tara Brach: true refuge, interview with Tami Simon, in Insights at the Edge (pod-
cast). Sounds True, June 11, 2019. Available at: https://www.resources.soundstrue.com/
podcast/tara-brach-true-refuge. Accessed May 1, 2022.
Cantor D, Fisher B, Chibnall S, et al: Report on the AAU Campus Climate Survey on Sexual
Assault and Sexual Misconduct. Washington, DC, Association of American Universities,
2015. Available at: https://www.aau.edu/sites/default/files/%40%20Files/
Climate%20Survey/AAU_Campus_Climate_Survey_12_14_15.pdf. Accessed May 20,
2022.
Cantor D, Fisher B, Chibnall S, et al: Report on the AAU Campus Climate Survey on Sexual
Assault and Misconduct, Revised. Washington, DC, Association of American Universities,
2020. Available at: https://www.aau.edu/sites/default/files/AAU-Files/Key-Issues/
Campus-Safety/Revised%20Aggregate%20report%20%20and%20appendices%201-7_
(01-16-2020_FINAL).pdf. Accessed May 20, 2022.
Crenshaw K: Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against
women of color, in Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings That Formed the Movement.
Edited by Crenshaw K, Gotanda N, Peller G, Thomas K. New York, The New Press, 1995,
pp 357–383
Depraetere J, Vandeviver C, Beken TV, Keygnaert I: Big boys don’t cry: a critical interpretive
synthesis of male sexual victimization. Trauma Violence Abuse 21(5):991–1010, 2020
30554559
Introduction xxv
Harris JC: Women of color undergraduate students’ experiences with campus sexual assault:
an intersectional analysis. Rev High Ed 44:1–30, 2020
Harris J, Linder C (eds): Intersections of Identity and Sexual Violence on Campus: Centering
Minoritized Students’ Experiences. Sterling, VA, Stylus, 2017
Hirsch JS, Khan S: Sexual Citizens: Sex, Power, and Assault on Campus. New York, W.W. Nor-
ton, 2020.
Hong L: Digging up the roots, rustling the leaves: a critical consideration of the root causes of
sexual violence and why higher education needs more courage, in Intersections of Identity
and Sexual Violence on Campus: Centering Minoritized Students’ Experiences. Edited by
Harris J, Linder C. Sterling, VA, Stylus, 2017, pp 23–41
Krebs CK, Lindquist CH, Warner TD, et al: The Campus Sexual Assault (CSA) Study Final
Report. Washington, DC, National Institute of Justice, 2007
McCauley HL, Casler AW: College sexual assault: a call for trauma-informed prevention. J Ad-
olesc Health 56(6):584–585, 2015 26003573
Roberts LW, Dority K, Balon R, et al: Academic psychiatry’s role in addressing campus sexual
assault. Acad Psychiatry 40(4):567–571, 2016 27052505
Smith CP, Freyd JJ: Institutional betrayal. Am Psychol 69(6):575–587, 2014 25197837
PART I
Prevention
We begin with a focus on prevention, recognizing that, from a develop-

mental and social-ecological perspective, addressing problems of sexual and rela-
tionship violence requires preventing their occurrence to begin with. This stance
also transcends the healing of individual students to encompass the cultural
change necessary to end sexual and relationship violence on college campuses. In
Chapter 1, “It’s Never Too Early, It’s Never Too Late,” Wilson begins in child-
hood, a developmental period ignored in most literature on this topic. The choice
to begin there acknowledges that the roots of consensual, nonviolent relation-
ships are planted long before youth enter college. In Chapter 2, “Prevention in
Primary Education,” Ludin and Debnam discuss the programming needed to de-
velop healthy, consensual romantic and sexual relationships during adolescence
and describe school-based interventions supported by research. In Chapter 3,
“Prevention at the University Level,” Flanery reviews the strategies found most
effective at the college and university level and the limitations of typical ap-
proaches in bringing about the deep cultural changes needed.
•1•
It’s Never Too Early,
It’s Never Too Late
Fostering Sexual Citizenship in
Humans of All Ages
The aim of each thing which we do is to make our lives and the lives of
our children richer and more possible.
—Audre Lorde (1978)
Walking past my daughter’s room recently, I overheard the following ex-

change between my 6-year-old twins:
My daughter: Stop tackling me!

My son: I thought you liked it.
My daughter: I don’t like it!
Becoming a good sexual citizen who respects the autonomy and boundaries of
other humans (Hirsch and Kahn 2020) can begin at the very earliest stages of life.
At first, it is not directly about sexual interactions; it is about respect for other
people’s bodies and humanity. In my own family, the concepts of consent,
boundaries, and respect for others’ bodies have been a regular focus since before
3
4 Facing Campus Sexual Assault and Relationship Violence With Courage
the twins could talk. My daughter has learned to assert her needs and boundaries
very clearly. My son is still working on understanding others’ boundaries and the
idea that what he enjoys may be different from what someone else wants or en-
joys. These are some of the early lessons in becoming sexual citizens.
I hope to share in this chapter how teaching people, young and old, about
consent and boundaries can be a natural, ongoing part of our interactions. On the
one hand, our culture is flooded with images of sexuality and unhealthy pressures
to be accomplished sexually. Yet very few of us know how to have healthy, nor-
malized discussions of sexuality with our kids, students, patients and clients, or
other adults. Getting comfortable with this topic and thinking about how to in-
fuse it into our regular, everyday interactions can make it feel less scary and less
threatening.
In this chapter, I bring together knowledge from a variety of sources. I provide
evidence from research wherever possible. However, the most extensive research
available has focused on avoiding health outcomes such as sexually transmitted
infections, unplanned pregnancies, and sexual assaults. This focus may be more
attractive for receiving grant funding and for getting published in academic jour-
nals; however, it does not encompass the vastly more expansive ways that hu-
mans relate to intimate interactions. Most academic literature has focused on
teens or older individuals, ignoring the essential foundations that are established
earlier in life. Thus, in this chapter I rely heavily on wisdom gained from educa-
tional and clinical work with children and families. I also share my personal expe-
riences as a parent. I acknowledge that my experience will not reflect everyone’s
experience.
As a White cisgender woman, professional, and academic raising two chil-
dren who appear to identify as cisgender, there is much that I cannot imagine
about the diversity of parenting and childhood experiences. In “Age, Race, Class,
and Sex,” Audre Lorde (1984), a renowned writer and Black lesbian mother,
wrote about the experiences of Black mothers:
But Black women and our children know the fabric of our lives is stitched with
violence and with hatred, that there is no rest. We do not deal with it only on the
picket lines, or in the dark midnight alleys, or in the places where we dare to ver-
balize our resistance. For us, increasingly, violence weaves through the daily tis-
sues of our living—in the supermarket, in the classroom, in the elevator, in the
clinic and the schoolyard, from the plumber, the baker, the saleswoman, the bus
driver, the bank teller, the waitress who does not serve us. (p. 119)
More recently, in her essay “Black Girlhood, Interrupted,” Tressie McMillan

Cottom (2019) illustrated how Black girls are socialized to accept and internalize
sexual objectification and lack of agency over their bodies within a system that has
It’s Never Too Early, It’s Never Too Late 5
made invisible the reality of sexual violence directed toward Black girls. She con-
cluded,
But for black girls, home is both a refuge and where your most intimate betrayals
happen. You cannot turn off that setting. It is the dining room at your family’s
house, served with a side of your uncle’s famous ribs. Home is where they love
you until you’re a ho. (p. 194)
Sexual objectification and sexual violence occur within and across all races,
ethnicities, genders, sexual orientations, backgrounds, and identities. However,
as these narratives attest, experiences of sexual violence, and responses to these
experiences, are deeply entwined with intersectional experiences of systemic op-
pression. Children of every color face these challenges, yet the landscape is par-
ticularly complicated for young women of color and for other children holding
multiple marginalized identities. It is also within these confined realities that we
must consider how parents and teachers approach conversations about consent
with children of diverse backgrounds who do not share equitable access to safety
or respect for bodies.
Definition of Consent
In the essay from which I quoted earlier, “Uses of the Erotic: The Erotic as
Power,” Lorde (1984) equated erotic with emotional—“how acutely and fully we
can feel in the doing” (p. 54). From this concept, we can begin to transform the
way we think about the origins of sexual citizenship early in life, as embodied in
emotional connections with other humans and being tuned to one’s own emo-
tions. Indeed, the Latin roots of the word consent literally equate to feeling (sen-
tire) together (con).
Consent refers to an affirmative nonverbal act or a verbal statement that ex-
presses agreement to engage in physical contact or a sexual act. It is informed,
freely given, and mutually understood. It is ongoing and can be revoked at any
time. Lack of protest or resistance does not mean consent, nor does silence mean
consent. Consent to one act does not mean consent to another act. Ultimately,
consent allows for mutual power and control, which leads to more satisfying and
less harmful relationships.
Preventive interventions focused on healthy sexual and romantic relation-
ships typically begin during high school or sometimes not until youth matricu-
late at colleges and universities, and most have focused either on avoiding
sexually transmitted infections and unplanned pregnancies or on compliance
with legal and institutional policies related to sexual assault (Hirsch and Kahn
2020). Consent is often treated as a contractual arrangement. Very rarely do ed-
ucational programs approach consent or sexuality as emotional connections

between humans. Yet this basic empathic awareness is needed to develop healthy,
fully embodied, and mutually respectful sexual identities and relationships.
Why Discussion of Consent and Boundaries

Should Begin in Childhood
Sexual and relationship violence is a huge problem both in the United States
and around the world. Estimates from a nationally representative survey in the
United States suggested that 44% of women and 25% of men will experience
some form of nonconsensual sexual contact in their lifetime (Smith et al. 2018).
These experiences begin by adolescence, with nationally representative sur-
veys suggesting that 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 20 boys experience sexual abuse before
they turn 18 (Finkelhor et al. 2014). On college campuses, recent estimates sug-
gest that 26% of undergraduate women, 7% of undergraduate men, and 23% of
trans and gender-expansive students have experienced unwanted sexual contact
(Cantor et al. 2020). One in three adolescents in the United States is estimated
to be a victim of physical, sexual, emotional, or verbal abuse from a dating part-
ner (Liz Claiborne Inc. 2009). Nearly 1 in 10 high school students reports being
physically injured by a boyfriend or girlfriend (Basile et al. 2020). Again, youth
who identify as trans and gender-expansive and hold nonheterosexual identities
report the highest rates of relationship violence.
As Hirsch and Kahn (2020) discussed in their book Sexual Citizens: Sex,
Power, and Assault on Campus, the norms and patterns leading to campus sexual
violence are set in motion long before students set foot on college campuses. Cul-
tural norms preclude honest, open discussions about sexuality that promote
agency and autonomy over our bodies in interpersonal interactions and respect
for others’ agency and autonomy over their bodies. We are disadvantaging young
people by failing to talk to them about or to model healthy relationships—sexual
and otherwise. It is not for lack of awareness of the dangers of unprotected sex and
the perils of date rape—youth receive information on these risks through school
programming and often from their parents. However, youth lack models or un-
derstanding of what healthy, consensual, and respectful relationships look and
feel like. Parents, teachers, and others who work with young people can be a part
of changing this reality by beginning to teach children about consent and respect
for others’ bodies early on. These early experiences set the foundation for con-
sensual, respectful relationships in adolescence, when young people begin dating
and having sexual interactions, and beyond into adulthood.
As the mother of twins, I have found opportunities to talk about, demon-
strate, and model consent from the very beginning of my children’s lives. My son
has always been significantly bigger and more active than my daughter. I have a
favorite photo of my son literally crawling over my daughter when they were ba-
bies. My daughter’s face seems to express, “Ugh, not again!” Moving my son’s
body off my daughter’s body and saying “Look at her face, she doesn’t like that”
was a way of teaching about boundaries. Even if they do not fully understand the
words, babies understand tone and do understand words before they can speak
them. As my children have gotten older, I have continued to talk about consent
and to remind them to ask for permission before kissing, hugging, or touching
each other’s bodies in other ways. Having twins has certainly created lots of op-
portunities for this. However, the same principles apply to different-age siblings,
play groups, schoolmates, park and school friends, and so forth. We also teach
about consent in parents’ interactions with young children. Asking before touch-
ing a child’s body and providing choices whenever possible normalizes consent
within close relationships.
Norms and expectations about personal space and touch differ across nation-
alities and cultures (Sorokowska et al. 2021). As Kreuz and Roberts (2017) ex-
plained, for example, social distance is typically closer in the Middle East than in
the United States. Kissing on the cheeks is expected among French acquain-
tances, and in some other cultures women ride in separate subway cars to avoid
close contact with men. Adults must consider these cultural norms and values
when discussing consent with children. Youth who are recent immigrants or
who are traveling internationally to the United States for school must under-
stand and learn how to navigate American norms around touch, personal space,
and consent. Likewise, parents raising first-generation children in the United
States may need support navigating these issues within U.S. culture. Although
there is no one-size-fits-all model, the guidelines presented in Table 1–1 offer
suggestions for how to integrate consent into regular interactions with children.
General Guidelines for

Teaching About Consent
It’s Never Too Early (or Too Late) to Start
Learning about consent can start at the very beginning of life. It is never too early
to introduce these topics to children. It is also never too late to start. Methods and
content of teaching evolve over the course of development (National Child
Traumatic Stress Network 2009). What you share with a 4-year-old is very differ-
ent from what you need to share with a 14-year-old who may or will soon be ac-
tively interested in dating relationships. However, if the caregivers of a teenager
have not yet brought up these topics, they certainly are not alone. Most people
Table 1–1. Guidelines for teaching children about consent
It’s never too early (or too late) to start.

It’s not just about private parts and sexual interactions.
Children need lots of practice setting and respecting boundaries.
Model consent and respect for boundaries.
Help children pay attention to others’ feelings.
Encourage children to ask for permission before showing physical affection.
Never force children to receive affection from someone else, even a family member.
Teach children to say no and to stop when someone else says no.
Encourage kids to listen to their gut feeling or pay attention to “yucky” feelings.
in our culture never have significant, meaningful, or helpful conversations about

consensual sex with their kids—or with anyone else, for that matter (Hirsch and
Kahn 2020).
It's Not Just About Private Parts

and Sexual Interactions
Although teaching children about their private parts and about sex in develop-
mentally appropriate doses is important, that is just the tip of the iceberg. Much
of what children need to know about consent comes from nonsexual everyday
interactions. Setting an early foundation has little to do with sex at all, yet it will
set the stage for healthy dating and sexual relationships later in life. Adults can
point to others’ emotions and direct children to ask permission before entering
another child’s space or touching someone else’s body. Children also benefit
when adults say no to the child’s behavior (e.g., “I don’t like that,” “I don’t want
you to climb on me right now”).
Children Need Lots of Practice

Setting and Respecting Boundaries
Observing children in their natural play reveals numerous opportunities to help
them think about and practice giving consent and setting boundaries. Early on,
children have little awareness of how their bodies affect others. As children grow
up, there are numerous opportunities in everyday interactions and in play to
make observations about consent and to practice consent, setting boundaries,
and respecting others’ boundaries. Adults can point out when a child’s body is
touching someone else’s and remind them to ask if it is okay. Reminding chil-
Table 1–2. Example language for teaching children about

consent
Scenario Example of what to say
Saying goodbye to a friend “Ask Zoe if she would like a hug goodbye.”
Zoe says no or looks uncomfortable.
Respond cheerfully, “That’s okay! We can
wave goodbye to Zoe.”
Parent leaving for work “Can I give you a hug and a kiss?”
Child says no or turns away.
“Okay! How about a high five?”
Child still says no or does not respond.
“That’s okay. I love you and will see you later!”
Another child says no to physical “Ethan said no, and when we hear no, we
affection or other action always stop what we’re doing immediately.
No matter what.”
Child does not want to hug Grandma “Would you rather give Grandma a high-five or
blow her a kiss, maybe?”
Talk to Grandma later about why we do not
force children to give hugs.
Another child looks unhappy or “Look at Sammy’s face. Do they like that?
uncomfortable in an interaction Imagine how you would feel if Sammy hit
you. It wouldn’t feel good, would it?”
dren to ask before taking another child’s toy and teaching them that they can say
yes or no when another child asks them to play are also ways to practice consent.
In games that involve wrestling or tagging, remind children to continue to check
in on whether it feels fun for everyone. Table 1–2 provides some example verbal
language that can be used to teach children about consent.
Model Consent and Respect for Boundaries

Demonstrating consent in interactions with young people and within one’s own
relationships is one of the most powerful ways to help children understand what
it looks like. I encourage adults to really look at how consent comes up in their
own relationships. Think about how many times you just assume someone wants
a hug or wants to shake your hand, how normal it is to touch people’s bodies in
these intimate ways without even asking (acknowledging that these are very typ-
ical interactions across cultures). Try noticing all the opportunities for consent
that occur every day and start asking for consent; notice how it feels different and
becomes natural. Asking someone “Can I give you a hug?” before hugging them
can feel even more warm and connected. Asking before shaking someone’s hand
can feel even more respectful. Be ready to accept a “no” and observe what that
feels like. Learn to accept “no” so that you can teach young people to accept it
from another person.
I also encourage caregivers and other adults to talk to their partners about
consent and to start an explicit practice of consent within their relationships and
intimate encounters. Truly practicing consent and understanding what it feels
like can help adults teach young people how consent feels and how it contributes
to mutual relationships. In front of kids, caregivers can model asking each other
for consent before hugging or kissing, for example, and then these interactions
just become normal and expected aspects of loving, intimate relationships.
Adults can also model consent by respecting children’s boundaries and ask-
ing for consent before making bodily contact. It is helpful to give kids choices
whenever possible. In the bath, you can ask “Do you want me to wash you, or do
you want to wash yourself?” Parents always comment that there are things we
have to do to take care of our kids’ bodies. This is true, and those things can be
done in respectful ways that involve choice and consent as much as possible. For
example, although we have to brush young children’s teeth to keep them healthy,
we can offer choices about how to do this (“Do you want Mommy or Daddy to
brush your teeth?” “Do you want to stand on the stool or sit on my lap?” “Do you
want to do the top or bottom first?” “We have to brush your teeth. How can we
make it more comfortable for you?”).
Help Children Pay Attention to Others’ Feelings

Fostering empathy in children also establishes a foundation for consent, which
involves tuning in to another person’s experience (i.e., feeling together). Strategies
for developing empathy in young children include simply pointing out another
child’s emotional reaction (e.g., “Look at Billy’s face, I don’t think he liked that”),
asking a child what another child is feeling (e.g., “Look at Mary’s face, how is she
feeling?”), or expressing an emotional reaction (e.g., “I feel sad when you hit
me”). Emotional coaching from caregivers is associated with several positive in-
terpersonal outcomes, including better regulation of anger and mood in adoles-
cence, fewer aggressive interactions, and better social skills and peer relationships
throughout childhood and adolescence (Katz et al. 2012). Because dating and ro-
mantic relationships often develop out of peer groups (Furman and Rose 2015)
and involve intense emotions (Larson et al. 1999), these skills can translate into
consensual, respectful interactions with dating and sexual partners.
Encourage Children to Ask for Permission

Before Showing Physical Affection
Children can learn to ask others before giving a hug, a kiss, or a high five or oth-
erwise interacting with another person’s body. Asking permission can be part of
a warm, enthusiastic, and affectionate interaction (see Table 1–2 for example lan-
guage). Through modeling, as described earlier in the section “Model Consent
and Respect for Boundaries,” and coaching children, asking permission can be-
come a normal part of intimate interactions. Thus, when youth begin dating and
having sexual interactions, asking before holding someone’s hand or giving them
a kiss will feel normal and routine. This guideline, as well as the one that follows,
will need to be navigated within the context of differing family, community, and
cultural norms and expectations for physical touch. These guidelines are not
meant to dismiss the importance of cultural practices and can be implemented
in ways that are compassionate, collaborative, and respectful.
Never Force Children to Receive Affection

From Someone Else, Even a Family Member
Not forcing a child to receive affection can be challenging for caregivers, partic-
ularly in families that place a great deal of emphasis on showing respect for el-
ders. However, it is important for children to feel agency over their own bodies
so that they are allowed to choose how to interact with others and can decline
physical affection, even from a beloved grandparent, aunt, uncle, or other rela-
tive. Allowing children agency in this way provides a powerful message that nor-
malizes their ability to say no to other kinds of physical touch in other contexts,
such as desired dating and intimacy as well as abusive interactions. Although po-
tentially challenging and uncomfortable, it can be helpful for caregivers to dis-
cuss the reason for this practice with relatives so they can support it and find
consensual ways to show and receive affection from children that align with fam-
ily and cultural values. As part of our routine, I ask my children for permission to
give them a hug and kiss at bedtime and when I drop them off at school. I remem-
ber a time when my son declined a kiss. It stung, although I calmly accepted his
response and was proud of his ability to show agency.
Teach Children to Say No and to Stop

When Someone Else Says No
The word no is one of the first that children learn, around age 2, and represents
the most basic language for establishing physical and emotional boundaries. It is
important for children to develop comfort in saying no when a physical inter-
action is unwanted and to immediately stop when someone else says no. Along
with the concept of no, children can learn that it is okay to stop playing with some-
one who does not listen when they say no or does things that do not feel okay.
Children should feel empowered to end interactions with children who do not
listen to their boundaries or do other things that are hurtful.
Encourage Kids to Listen to Their Gut Feeling

or to Pay Attention to “Yucky” Feelings
Caregivers and others can teach children that their gut reactions are valid and
worth listening to. Adults can also validate a child’s reaction to gut feelings and
respect their wish to end an interaction or get help with a hurtful interaction.
Pushing children to be polite and continue to play with a child who is not respect-
ing boundaries can send the message that the child’s own boundaries are not im-
portant. By contrast, teaching children to end harmful play interactions tells them
that their bodies and boundaries are valuable and worth protecting. This sets the
stage for ending harmful interactions with future dating and sexual partners.
Tips for Talking to Children

About Consent and Sexuality
Be Casual
Adults, both parents and professionals, are often uncomfortable broaching topics
of sexuality (Flores and Barroso 2017; Hirsch and Kahn 2020). Perhaps the rea-
son is because very few of us grew up in families or communities that modeled
how to talk about sexuality in healthy or helpful ways. It turns out that if we as
adults seem uncomfortable, children will also be uncomfortable and will receive
the message that sexuality is something shameful or embarrassing, rather than a
normal part of human experience. Conversations that happen organically and
casually are likely to be better received by young people and therefore more im-
pactful. Having casual, comfortable conversations about sexuality can take prac-
tice, which can include having these conversations with other adults. When I talk
to parents about this topic, I start by asking them to reflect on their own values
and the messages they received about sexuality and then to pair up and talk with
others in the room. These kinds of conversations with other adults may be the
icebreakers needed to have comfortable, casual conversations with kids.
Vignette 1
A family with a 4-year-old child was having dinner with friends, including another
4-year-old and a 7-year-old. One of the 4-year-olds asked if they could marry the
other 4-year-old when they grew up. The parents were laughing and talking
about how that could happen, if they both decided they wanted to marry each
other. Then the 7-year-old blurted out, “Yeah and then they can have sex!” The
parents initially froze and looked uncomfortably across the table at each other. A
mother of the 7-year-old then responded in a calm, casual tone that “yes, grown-
ups sometimes decide to have sex” and left it at that. The adults then gently
moved the conversation to other topics.
Normalize Talking About Bodies, Consent, and Respect

Children are most able to receive and absorb messages that occur on a regular
basis as part of natural interactions and discussions. Capitalizing on opportuni-
ties to bring up or discuss topics of bodies, consent, and respect, rather than
avoid them, can normalize these topics and reduce shame and fear around them.
When my children were about 3 years old, we were visiting their grandparents,
and their 5-year-old cousin was also there. Their cousin was getting ready for her
bath and ran past us, naked. My children were extremely interested and started
saying, “We saw [cousin]’s butt! She has a butt!” Rather than shutting down the
conversation, we casually responded that “Yes, she has a butt just like you.” When
the interest began to feel intrusive, we set a gentle boundary—“Yes, she does have
a butt, and it might make her feel uncomfortable to keep talking about it.” Later,
my son commented, “But [cousin] doesn’t have a penis.” Again, we responded
casually to the comment and affirmed that his cousin does not have a penis, that
she has labia and a vagina like his sister. When he then asked, “But who has a penis
like me?” we were able to name some folks who have penises—Dad and Grandad.
We try to avoid emphasizing binary sex or gender through language, such as
“boys have penises, and girls have vaginas,” but rather create the notion that “peo-
ple have different body parts; some have penises, some have vaginas.”
It is normal for young children to show interest in their own and others’ sex-
ual body parts (Hornor 2004). In young children, this interest may manifest as
asking questions about body parts, touching one’s own genitals, or touching a
mother’s breasts. Older children may engage in showing or touching their own
or other children’s body parts in games such as “playing doctor.” Unfortunately,
most of what has been written about children’s sexual play relates to preventing
abuse or differentiating between normal behavior and signs of sexual abuse.
Cause for concern should arise if children engage in more sophisticated, adultlike
behaviors, such as simulating sexual acts or asking to view sexually explicit mate-
rial, or if the behaviors are aggressive, harmful to others, or secretive or cannot be
redirected. There is a substantial literature on the topic of recognizing signs of
abuse (e.g., Hornor 2004; Kellogg and American Academy of Pediatrics Com-
mittee on Child Abuse and Neglect 2009).
Nonetheless, most interest in sexual body parts is a normal part of human de-
velopment—indeed, of becoming a sexual citizen. As evidenced in the anecdote
just described, my son’s interest in his cousin’s body was largely about understand-
ing his own body. When adults respond to these interests in ways that normalize
rather than shame, children are supported in developing healthy, respectful rela-
tionships with their own and others’ bodies. Children can also benefit from look-
ing at pictures in books to learn about sexual anatomy, and this choice can help
establish privacy around actual people’s bodies.
As also demonstrated, we must use anatomically correct language when we
talk to children about sexual body parts. Creating made-up, pet names for body
parts can suggest there is something shameful about these parts. Also, if children
do experience sexual abuse, they need to have the correct language to tell adults
what happened. A Washington Post article (Theriault 2015) shared the following
story from a child psychotherapist: “She once had a client who had been taught
that her vagina was her ‘purse.’ The child told her teacher about abuse, but the
teacher didn’t initially understand because the child was using the wrong word.”
Be Open and Curious—Don’t Assume

You Know What Your Child Is Asking
In her blog for parents of young children, pediatric nurse Judy Kivowitz (2019)
shared the following anecdote:
There is a story about a young boy visiting his grandparents’ house one summer.
He came rushing in from outside, where he had been playing with some new
friends from the neighborhood. “Grandma, what’s it called when two people are
in bed, but one is on top of the other one?”
Grandma was taken aback for a moment but sat him down and gave him a
matter of fact talk about the birds and the bees, so to speak. The little boy listened
carefully with his eyes open wide and then ran back out to join his friends. It
wasn’t long before he ran back into the house saying, “Grandma, it’s called BUNK
BEDS, and Mrs. Wilson wants to talk to you!”
For young children in particular, it is useful to clarify what a child is asking

about before launching into a more detailed discussion than necessary. As a gen-
eral guideline, it is most helpful to start by providing simplified information and
expanding as needed based on children’s questions. When my children were
4 years old, a classmate’s mother was pregnant. I told the kids that their friend
was going to have a baby brother. My daughter asked, “How do you know it’s go-
ing to be a boy?” She was already familiar with the concept that a baby starts out
in a mother’s uterus. I described how pregnant women have ultrasounds done to
see the baby in their uterus and that the doctor can determine the sex of the baby.
I answered the questions she asked about this but followed her lead and did not
go beyond her level of curiosity. When children start to ask more about how ba-
bies are made and how the baby gets in the mother’s uterus, adults can slowly
start to introduce the concept of sexual intercourse and reproduction and even
use the term sex, although the conversation can unfold naturally and gradually
over time in response to questions that children ask. As illustrated in Vignette 1,
a 7-year-old might be ready to add the word sex to her vocabulary, whereas that
level of detail may be unhelpful for a younger child. Adults should also move be-
yond talking about sex as a reproductive act to share that it is something loving
and pleasurable for people with grown-up bodies who consent to doing it to-
gether; if the 4-year-old children had asked, the adults then could have provided
a simple explanation such as that. As illustrated next in Vignette 2, older youth
and teenagers are likely to have more in-depth questions about topics, such as
condom use and contraceptives. Once again, it is important to bring discussion
of consent into these conversations.
Vignette 2
Dr. K was in the car with his teenage daughter and his daughter’s friend. The girls
were giggling in the backseat, and then the friend said to Dr. K, “I want to hear
the talk too!” When Dr. K explored further, the friend explained that Dr. K’s
daughter had told her about a condom demonstration and practice she had done
with her father. Dr. K agreed to show the friend this demonstration when they got
home. Meanwhile, the girls texted some other friends and invited them to come
over for the demonstration as well. Dr. K contacted the parents of the other
youth, who consented (expressing relief and encouragement) for Dr. K to do the
condom demonstration with their kids. Dr. K used a banana to walk the kids
through the steps of how to properly use a condom and responded to their ques-
tions about what kinds of condoms there are and how it feels to use one. He al-
lowed the kids to open and touch the condoms and to practice putting them on
a banana. He also showed them female condoms and talked about how to get
them. Dr. K talked to the kids about making healthy decisions about having sex
and the importance of mutual consent, as well as staying safe during sex. He al-
lowed the discussion to be fun and interactive and offered to be available for any
further questions the kids had.
A decades-old body of research examining links between parent-teen com-

munication and reduction of risky sexual behavior suggests that the quality of
communication is at least as important as the frequency or quantity (Flores and
Barroso 2017; Wilson and Donenberg 2004). In particular, teens appear to ben-
efit from parental communication about sexuality that is open, is responsive to
questions, and allows for differing points of view. A similar approach to discuss-
ing consent and respect in the context of sexual interactions is likely to be bene-
ficial. Teens also benefit from receiving guidance from their parents and hearing
about their parents’ beliefs and values regarding sexuality (Flores and Barroso
2017; Wilson and Donenberg 2004). Despite common misconceptions, most
teens want to be able to talk to their parents about sexuality and value their par-
ents’ experience and perspectives. Moreover, teenagers benefit greatly from the
religious and cultural values their families share, even more so if these discus-
sions can be done in a way that is open and responsive to questions and the dif-
ferent ideas and roles teens may be exploring. Of course, cultural taboos around
the discussion of sex and the consequences of sexual activities will shape these
conversations. Nonetheless, it is important for young people to hear from their
parents that no matter their sexual identities and the interactions they choose
to have, they will continue to be accepted and loved by their families. Such con-
versations are likely to be more natural and comfortable if they are rooted in
norms and dialogue established early in life.
Find Natural Moments to Bring Up These Topics

As illustrated in the anecdotes and vignettes, many natural opportunities arise
for bringing up topics around sexuality or responding to questions that children
initiate. Examples include bath time, scenes in movies or television shows, and
pregnancies and childbirths among friends and family. With young children,
bath time is a great opportunity to talk about body parts and a time when chil-
dren often ask about their own and their siblings’ sexual body parts. An article in
Parents (Hatvany 2017) shared an example of how to use a movie scene to initi-
ate a discussion of consent with a teenager:
I was sitting with my 15-year-old son when a sex scene in a movie showed a man
and woman kissing even though the woman tried to push him away. The man
shoved her onto the bed, lifted her skirt, and began having sex with her. “Do you
think that’s what a man should do?” I asked my son, casually, and the question
ended up launching a more detailed, nuanced discussion about how to identify
and respect a person’s nonverbal communication. At every opportunity, reem-
phasize and reinforce what you have taught about respecting a person’s “no.”
Use Play With Dolls or Stuffed Animals

Young children learn about and understand the world through play. Thus, the
use of dolls or stuffed animals can be a powerful tool for introducing concepts of
sexuality and consent with children. Bearing in mind that these concepts begin
with everyday interactions, adults can set up play-based scenarios that involve
asking for consent, saying no, or recognizing emotions. These scenarios can in-
clude the same kinds of language as the real-life scenarios in Table 1–2.
Table 1–3. Tips for talking to children about consent and

sexuality
Be casual.
Normalize talking about bodies, consent, and respect.
Be open and curious—do not assume you know what your child is asking.
Find natural moments to bring up these topics.
Use play with dolls or stuffed animals.
Body Safety and Privacy Rules

Children of all ages benefit from guidance related to safety and privacy. The Na-
tional Child Traumatic Stress Network (2009) provided recommendations for
what kinds of safety information to share with children at different ages (Table
1–3). Before age 4, children need to learn that their bodies belong to themselves
and that they can say no to being touched, even by grown-ups. Young children
can develop the concept of “okay touch” that is wanted and feels good and “not-
okay touch” that is uncomfortable, unwanted, or painful. Young children can
learn that they have special private parts that they keep safe and do not show to
anyone other than caregivers, for things like bathing, or to a doctor. It is also
helpful to teach young children the difference between a surprise, which is some-
thing fun that the person will eventually discover and be happy about (e.g., a sur-
prise birthday present for Mom), and a secret that the child is not supposed to
tell and that feels bad or scary. Children can learn that it is never okay for some-
one to ask them to keep a secret from their caregivers and that they will not be
in trouble if they tell their caregivers about the secret.
Between ages 4 and 6 years, children should learn that sexual abuse is when
someone touches the child’s special private parts, tries to touch the child’s private
parts, or asks the child to touch their private parts; that even known adults can do
this; and that it is never the child’s fault. Again, it is helpful for children to have
accurate, age-appropriate vocabulary and to know the correct names for their pri-
vate parts so that they can report abuse.
Older children and teens need to learn about safety in online and dating in-
teractions. This can include extending safety information from childhood to ap-
ply to these more independent adolescent scenarios. It also includes talking
explicitly about dating abuse, sexual violence, and predatory behavior online and
encouraging teens to talk to parents or other trusted adults if they have such an
experience. It is crucial for children of all ages to hear that it is never their fault if
someone harms them—even if they are breaking a rule or an expectation of their
parents when it happens.
Privacy rules demonstrate boundaries and help children establish boundar-

ies in relation to their own bodies. The rules will differ somewhat in every family
because they reflect family values and cultural norms as well as safety concerns.
Examples of privacy rules include the following:
• You don’t touch other people’s private parts.

• It is not okay for other people to touch your private parts.
• We keep our private parts covered in public.
• I know it feels nice to touch your private parts. That is something you can do
alone in your room.
Teaching Children to Be Upstanders

Finally, upstanding is another part of being a sexual citizen by stepping up when
someone else’s body, privacy, or identity is not being respected. As with other
concepts discussed here, upstander behaviors can be learned early in life. Talking
to kids about helping other children and alerting trusted grown-ups when others
need help is a way to instill these values. Adults can help children get used to ob-
serving behavior and checking in on what they see by asking children to watch
interactions and notice what is happening. Taking care of family pets can also pro-
vide examples, “Oh, it looks like the kitty’s tail is stuck! We have to help her!” Chil-
dren will learn these behaviors by being praised and reinforced for assisting others
who need help and asking grown-ups for help when needed.
Conclusion
It can feel uncomfortable, even scary, to think about addressing future sexual and
relationship violence with young children, and it can be difficult to know how to
start conversations about consent and boundaries. However, it is crucial to en-
gage children with these topics early in life so that they are instilled as natural
ways of interacting with others. There is no one right way to do this; the guide-
lines presented here may not all work for all families. These conversations should
also take place in the context of other uncomfortable, and essential, topics that
must be discussed openly with children, such as systemic racism and discrimi-
nation. Many of the tips and guidelines discussed here may also apply to those
topics. Harking back to the quotes from Black women at the beginning of this
chapter, many families experience sexual and relationship violence as inter-
twined with other forms of oppression and violence. I also talk regularly with my
children about systemic racism and violence (e.g., police violence toward Black
Americans, discrimination and stereotyping of Asian Americans). Although they
find these discussions upsetting, I know that understanding these realities is
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
command, and advanced with a force supposed to number in the
177
aggregate two thousand men to Stony Creek, within ten miles of
Vincent’s position at Hamilton, where sixteen hundred British
regulars were encamped. There Chandler and Winder posted
themselves for the night, much as Winchester and his Kentuckians
178
had camped at the river Raisin four months earlier.
Vincent was not to be treated with such freedom. Taking only
179
seven hundred rank-and-file, he led them himself against
Chandler’s camp. The attack began, in intense darkness, at two
o’clock in the morning of June 6. The British quickly broke the
American centre and carried the guns. The lines became mixed, and
extreme confusion lasted till dawn. In the darkness both American
generals, Chandler and Winder, walked into the British force in the
180
centre, and were captured. With difficulty the two armies
succeeded in recovering their order, and then retired in opposite
directions. The British suffered severely, reporting twenty-three killed,
one hundred and thirty-four wounded, and fifty-five missing, or two
hundred and twelve men in all; but they safely regained Burlington
181
Heights at dawn. The American loss was less in casualties, for it
amounted only to fifty-five killed and wounded, and one hundred
missing; but in results the battle at Stony Creek was equally
disgraceful and decisive. The whole American force, leaving the
dead unburied, fell back ten miles, where Major-General Lewis took
command in the afternoon of June 7. An hour later the British fleet
under Sir James Yeo made its appearance, threatening to cut off
Lewis’s retreat. Indians hovered about. Boats and baggage were
lost. Dearborn sent pressing orders to Lewis directing him to return,
182
and on the morning of June 8 the division reached Fort George.
These mortifications prostrated Dearborn, whose strength had
been steadily failing. June 8 he wrote to Armstrong: “My ill state of
health renders it extremely painful to attend to the current duties; and
unless my health improves soon, I fear I shall be compelled to retire
to some place where my mind may be more at ease for a short
183
time.” June 10, his adjutant-general, Winfield Scott, issued orders
devolving on Major-General Morgan Lewis the temporary command
184
not only of the Niagara army but also of the Ninth Military district.
“In addition to the debility and fever he has been afflicted with,” wrote
185
Dearborn’s aid, S. S. Connor, to Secretary Armstrong, June 12,
“he has, within the last twenty-four hours, experienced a violent
spasmodic attack on his breast, which has obliged him to relinquish
business altogether.” “I have doubts whether he will ever again be fit
186
for service,” wrote Morgan Lewis to Armstrong, June 14; “he has
been repeatedly in a state of convalescence, but relapses on the
least agitation of mind.” June 20 Dearborn himself wrote in a very
despondent spirit both in regard to his health and to the military
situation: “I have been so reduced in strength as to be incapable of
any command. Brigadier-General Boyd is the only general officer
187
present.”
The sudden departure of Morgan Lewis, ordered to Sackett’s
Harbor, left General Boyd for a few days to act as the general in
command at Niagara. Boyd, though well known for his success at
Tippecanoe, was not a favorite in the army. “A compound of
ignorance, vanity, and petulance,” wrote his late superior, Morgan
188
Lewis, “with nothing to recommend him but that species of
bravery in the field which is vaporing, boisterous, stifling reflection,
blinding observation, and better adapted to the bully than the
soldier.”
Galled by complaints of the imbecility of the army, Boyd, with
189
Dearborn’s approval, June 23, detached Colonel Boerstler of the
Fourteenth Infantry with some four hundred men and two field-
pieces, to batter a stone house at Beaver Dam, some seventeen
190
miles from Fort George. Early in the morning of June 24 Boerstler
marched to Beaver Dam. There he found himself surrounded in the
woods by hostile Indians, numbering according to British authority
about two hundred. The Indians, annoying both front and rear,
caused Boerstler to attempt retreat, but his retreat was stopped by a
191
few militia-men, said to number fifteen. A small detachment of
one hundred and fifty men came to reinforce Boerstler, and
Lieutenant Fitzgibbon of the British Forty-ninth regiment, with forty-
seven men, reinforced the Indians. Unable to extricate himself, and
dreading dispersion and massacre, Boerstler decided to surrender;
and his five hundred and forty men accordingly capitulated to a
British lieutenant with two hundred and sixty Indians, militia, and
regulars.
Dearborn reported the disaster as “an unfortunate and
192
unaccountable event;” but of such events the list seemed
endless. A worse disaster, equally due to Dearborn and Chauncey,
occurred at the other end of the Lake. Had they attacked Kingston,
as Armstrong intended, their movement would have covered
Sackett’s Harbor; but when they placed themselves a hundred and
fifty miles to the westward of Sackett’s Harbor, they could do nothing
to protect it. Sackett’s Harbor was an easy morning’s sail from
Kingston, and the capture of the American naval station was an
object of infinite desire on the part of Sir George Prevost, since it
would probably decide the result of the war.
Prevost, though not remarkable for audacity, could not throw
away such an opportunity without ruining his reputation. He came to
Kingston, and while Dearborn was preparing to capture Fort George
in the night of May 26–27, Prevost embarked his whole regular force,
193
eight hundred men all told, on Yeo’s fleet at Kingston, set sail in
194
the night, and at dawn of May 27 was in sight of Sackett’s Harbor.
Had Yeo and Prevost acted with energy, they must have
captured the Harbor without serious resistance. According to Sir
George’s official report, “light and adverse winds” prevented the
195
ships from nearing the Fort until evening. Probably constitutional
vacillation on the part of Sir James Yeo caused delay, for Prevost left
196
the control wholly to him and Colonel Baynes.
At Sackett’s Harbor about four hundred men of different regular
regiments, and about two hundred and fifty Albany volunteers were
in garrison; and a general alarm, given on appearance of the British
fleet in the distance, brought some hundreds of militia into the place;
but the most important reinforcement was Jacob Brown, a brigadier-
general of State militia who lived in the neighborhood, and had been
requested by Dearborn to take command in case of an emergency.
Brown arrived at the Harbor in time to post the men in order of battle.
Five hundred militia were placed at the point where the British were
expected to land; the regulars were arranged in a second line; the
forts were in the rear.
(Larger)
EAST END
OF
LAKE ONTARIO
STRUTHERS & CO., ENGR’S., N.Y.
At dawn of May 28, under command of Colonel Baynes, the

British grenadiers of the One Hundredth regiment landed gallantly
under “so heavy and galling a fire from a numerous but almost
invisible foe, as to render it impossible to halt for the artillery to come
197
up.” Pressing rapidly forward, without stopping to fire, the British
regulars routed the militia and forced the second line back until they
reached a block-house at the edge of the village, where a thirty-two
pound gun was in position, flanked by log barracks and fallen timber.
While Brown with difficulty held his own at the military barracks, the
naval lieutenant in charge of the ship-yard, being told that the battle
was lost, set fire to the naval barracks, shipping, and store-houses.
Brown’s indignation at this act was intense.
“The burning of the marine barracks was as infamous a

transaction as ever occurred among military men,” he wrote to
198
Dearborn. “The fire was set as our regulars met the enemy
upon the main line; and if anything could have appalled these
gallant men it would have been the flames in their rear. We have
all, I presume, suffered in the public estimation in consequence
of this disgraceful burning. The fact is, however, that the army is
entitled to much higher praise than though it had not occurred.
The navy are alone responsible for what happened on Navy
Point, and it is fortunate for them that they have reputations
sufficient to sustain the shock.”
Brown’s second line stood firm at the barracks, and the British
attack found advance impossible. Sir George Prevost’s report
199
admitted his inability to go farther: —
“A heavier fire than that of musketry having become

necessary in order to force their last position, I had the
mortification to learn that the continuation of light and adverse
winds had prevented the co-operation of the ships, and that the
gunboats were unequal to silence the enemy’s elevated
batteries, or to produce any effect on their block houses.
Considering it therefore impracticable without such assistance to
carry the strong works by which the post was defended, I
reluctantly ordered the troops to leave a beaten enemy whom
they had driven before them for upwards of three hours, and
who did not venture to offer the slightest opposition to the re-
embarkation, which was effected with proper deliberation and in
perfect order.”
If Sir George was correct in regarding the Americans as “a

beaten enemy,” his order of retreat to his own troops seemed
improper; but his language showed that he used the words in a
sense of his own, and Colonel Baynes’s report gave no warrant for
200
the British claim of a victory.
201
“At this point,” said Baynes, “the further energies of the
troops became unavailing. Their [American] block-houses and
stockaded battery could not be carried by assault, nor reduced
by field-pieces had we been provided with them.... Seeing no
object within our reach to attain that could compensate for the
loss we were momentarily sustaining from the heavy fire of the
enemy’s cannon, I directed the troops to take up the position we
had charged from. From this position we were ordered to re-
embark, which was performed at our leisure and in perfect order,
the enemy not presuming to show a single soldier without the
limits of his fortress.”
Another and confidential report was written by E. B. Brenton of

202
Prevost’s staff to the governor’s military secretary, Noah Freer.
After describing the progress of the battle until the British advance
was stopped, Brenton said that Colonel Baynes came to Sir George
to tell him that the men could not approach nearer the works with
any prospect of success:—
“It was however determined to collect all the troops at a

point, to form the line, and to make an attack immediately upon
the battery and barracks in front. For this purpose the men in
advance were called in, the line formed a little without the reach
of the enemy’s musketry, and though evidently much fagged,
was, after being supplied with fresh ammunition, again led in
line. At this time I do not think the whole force collected in the
lines exceeded five hundred men.”
The attack was made, and part of the Hundred-and-fourth

regiment succeeded in getting shelter behind one of the American
barracks, preparing for a farther advance. Sir George Prevost, under
a fire which his aid described as tremendous,—“I do not exaggerate
when I tell you that the shot, both of musketry and grape, was falling
about us like hail,”—watched the American position through a glass,
when, “at this time those who were left of the troops behind the
barracks made a dash out to charge the enemy; but the fire was so
destructive that they were instantly turned by it, and the retreat was
sounded. Sir George, fearless of danger and disdaining to run or to
suffer his men to run, repeatedly called out to them to retire in order;
many however made off as fast as they could.”
These reports agreed that the British attack was totally defeated,
with severe loss, before the retreat was sounded. Such authorities
should have silenced dispute; but Prevost had many enemies in
Canada, and at that period of the war the British troops were unused
to defeat. Both Canadians and English attacked the governor-
general privately and publicly, freely charging him with having
disgraced the service, and offering evidence of his want of courage
203
in the action. Americans, though not interested in the defence of
Prevost, could not fail to remark that the British and Canadian
authorities who condemned him, assumed a condition of affairs
altogether different from that accepted by American authorities. The
official American reports not only supported the views taken by
Prevost and Baynes of the hopelessness of the British attack, but
added particulars which made Prevost’s retreat necessary. General
Brown’s opinion was emphatic: “Had not General Prevost retired
most rapidly under the guns of his vessels, he would never have
204
returned to Kingston.” These words were a part of Brown’s official
205
report. Writing to Dearborn he spoke with the same confidence: —
“The militia were all rallied before the enemy gave way, and
were marching perfectly in his view towards the rear of his right
flank; and I am confident that even then, if Sir George had not
retired with the utmost precipitation to his boats, he would have
been cut off.”
Unlike the Canadians, Brown thought Prevost’s conduct correct

and necessary, but was by no means equally complimentary to Sir
James Yeo, whom he blamed greatly for failing to join in the battle.
The want of wind which Yeo alleged in excuse, Brown flatly denied.
From that time Brown entertained and freely expressed contempt for
Yeo, as he seemed also to feel little respect for Chauncey. His
experience with naval administration on both sides led him to expect
nothing but inefficiency from either.
Whatever were the true causes of Prevost’s failure, Americans
could not admit that an expedition which cost the United States so
much, and which so nearly succeeded, was discreditable to the
British governor-general, or was abandoned without sufficient
reason. The British return of killed and wounded proved the
correctness of Prevost, Baynes, and Brown in their opinion of the
necessity of retreat. According to the report of Prevost’s severest
critics, he carried less than seven hundred and fifty rank-and-file to
206
Sackett’s Harbor. The returns showed forty-four rank-and-file
killed; one hundred and seventy-two wounded, and thirteen missing,
—in all, two hundred and twenty-nine men, or nearly one man in
three. The loss in officers was relatively even more severe; and the
total loss in an aggregate which could hardly have numbered much
more than eight hundred and fifty men all told, amounted to two
hundred and fifty-nine killed, wounded, and missing, leaving Prevost
207
less than six hundred men to escape, in the face of twice their
208
numbers and under the fire of heavy guns.
The British attack was repulsed, and Jacob Brown received
much credit as well as a commission of brigadier-general in the
United States army for his success; but the injury inflicted by the
premature destruction at the navy-yard was very great, and was
sensibly felt. Such a succession of ill news could not but affect the
Government. The repeated failures to destroy the British force at
Niagara; the disasters of Chandler, Winder, and Boerstler; the
narrow and partial escape of Sackett’s Harbor; the total incapacity of
Dearborn caused by fever and mortification,—all these evils were not
the only or the greatest subjects for complaint. The two
commanders, Dearborn and Chauncey, had set aside the secretary’s
plan of campaign, and had substituted one of their own, on the
express ground of their superior information. While affirming that the
garrison at Kingston had been reinforced to a strength three or four
times as great as was humanly possible, they had asserted that the
capture of York would answer their purpose as well as the capture of
Kingston, to “give us the complete command of the Lake.” They
captured York, April 27, but the British fleet appeared June 6, and
took from them the command of the Lake. These miscalculations or
misstatements, and the disasters resulting from them, warranted the
removal of Chauncey as well as Dearborn from command; but the
brunt of dissatisfaction fell on Dearborn alone. Both Cabinet and
Congress agreed in insisting on Dearborn’s retirement, and the
President was obliged to consent. July 6, Secretary Armstrong
wrote,—
“I have the President’s orders to express to you the decision

that you retire from the command of District No. 9, and of the
troops within the same, until your health be re-established and
until further orders.”
CHAPTER VIII.
Armstrong’s embarrassment was great in getting rid of the
generals whom Madison and Eustis left on his hands. Dearborn was
one example of what he was obliged to endure, but Wilkinson was a
209
worse. According to Armstrong’s account, New Orleans was not
believed to be safe in Wilkinson’s keeping. The senators from
Louisiana, Tennessee, and Kentucky remonstrated to the President,
and the President ordered his removal. Armstrong and Wilkinson
had been companions in arms, and had served with Gates at
Saratoga. For many reasons Armstrong wished not unnecessarily to
mortify Wilkinson, and in conveying to him, March 10, the abrupt
210
order to proceed with the least possible delay to the headquarters
of Major-General Dearborn at Sackett’s Harbor, the Secretary of War
211
added, March 12, a friendly letter of advice: —
“Why should you remain in your land of cypress when

patriotism and ambition equally invite to one where grows the
laurel? Again, the men of the North and East want you; those of
the South and West are less sensible of your merits and less
anxious to have you among them. I speak to you with a
frankness due to you and to myself, and again advise, Come to
the North, and come quickly! If our cards be well played, we may
renew the scene of Saratoga.”
The phrase was curious. Saratoga suggested defeated invasion

rather than conquest; the surrender of a British army in the heart of
New York rather than the capture of Montreal. The request for
Wilkinson’s aid was disheartening. No one knew better than
Armstrong the feebleness of Wilkinson’s true character. “The
selection of this unprincipled imbecile was not the blunder of
212
Secretary Armstrong,” said Winfield Scott long afterward; but the
idea that Wilkinson could be chief-of-staff to Dearborn,—that one
weak man could give strength to another,—was almost as surprising
as the selection of Wilkinson to chief command would have been.
Armstrong did not intend that Wilkinson should command more than
213
a division under Dearborn; but he must have foreseen that in the
event of Dearborn’s illness or incapacity, Wilkinson would become by
seniority general-in-chief.
(Larger)
REMARKS
Cedars: A small Village, a place of business, built pretty
compact, several stone houses: Settlers, Scottish and 9
or 10 French.
River d l’Isle The course of this River is S. and E. till
within 4 or 5 miles of the St. Lawrence thence it runs
almost parallel with that river to its mouth at the
Coteau. It is about 4 rods wide at its mouth and is
shoal. One mile above the confluence the distance is
only ¾ mile between the two rivers: The banks of both
are low and flat.
There is a settlement of 60 French Families or upwards
4 miles above Coteau. No road thence to Point Bodet
distant 7½ miles.
The road is excellent from Pt. Bodet to Raisin R.
McPherson keeps Tavern at Pt. Mouille and a Ferry to
Pt. Bodet.
McGee keeps Tavern at Pt. Bodet and a Ferry down the
Lake.
There is a Ferry from Coteau to Pt. Bodet.
MAP OF THE
RIVER ST. LAWRENCE
AND ADJACENT COUNTRY
From Williamsburg to Montreal.
FROM AN ORIGINAL DRAWING
IN THE
WAR DEPARTMENT.
Military and Topographical Atlas
By JOHN MELISH, 1815.
STRUTHERS & CO., ENGR’S, N.Y.
Wilkinson at New Orleans received Armstrong’s letter of March

214
10 only May 19, and started, June 10, for Washington, where he
arrived July 31, having consumed the greater part of the summer in
the journey. On arriving at Washington, he found that Dearborn had
been removed, and that he was himself by seniority in command of
215
the Ninth Military District. This result of Dearborn’s removal was
incalculably mischievous, for if its effect on Wilkinson’s vanity was
unfortunate, its influence on the army was fatal. Almost every
respectable officer of the old service regarded Wilkinson with
antipathy or contempt.
Armstrong’s ill-fortune obliged him also to place in the position of
next importance Wilkinson’s pronounced enemy, Wade Hampton. A
major-general was required to take command on Lake Champlain,
and but one officer of that rank claimed employment or could be
employed; and Wade Hampton was accordingly ordered to
216
Plattsburg. Of all the major-generals Hampton was probably the
best; but his faults were serious. Proud and sensitive even for a
South Carolinian; irritable, often harsh, sometimes unjust, but the
217
soul of honor, Hampton was rendered wholly intractable wherever
Wilkinson was concerned, by the long-standing feud which had
made the two generals for years the heads of hostile sections in the
218
army. Hampton loathed Wilkinson. At the time of his appointment
to command on Lake Champlain he had no reason to expect that
Wilkinson would be his superior; but though willing and even wishing
to serve under Dearborn, he accepted only on the express
219
understanding that his was a distinct and separate command, and
that his orders were to come directly from the War Department. Only
in case of a combined movement uniting different armies, was he to
yield to the rule of seniority. With that agreement he left Washington,
June 15, and assumed command, July 3, on Lake Champlain.
Nearly a month afterward Wilkinson arrived in Washington, and
reported at the War Department. By that time Armstrong had lost
whatever chance he previously possessed of drawing the army at
Niagara back to a position on the enemy’s line of supply. Three
insuperable difficulties stood in his way,—the season was too late;
the army was too weak; and the generals were incompetent.
Armstrong found his generals the chief immediate obstacle, and
struggled perseveringly and good-humoredly to overcome it.
Wilkinson began, on arriving at Washington, by showing a fancy for
220
continuing the campaign at Niagara. Armstrong was obliged to
give an emphatic order, dated August 8, that Kingston should be the
primary object of the campaign, but he left Wilkinson at liberty to go
221
there by almost any route, even by way of Montreal. Disappointed
at the outset by finding Wilkinson slow to accept responsibility or
222
decided views, he was not better pleased when the new general
began his duties in Military District No. 9.
Wilkinson left Washington August 11, and no sooner did he
reach Albany than he hastened to write, August 16, two letters to
General Hampton, assuming that every movement of that general
223
was directly dependent on Wilkinson’s orders. Considering the
relations between the two men, these letters warranted the inference
that Wilkinson intended to drive Hampton out of his Military District,
and if possible from the service. Hampton instantly leaped to that
conclusion, and wrote to Armstrong, August 23, offering his
resignation in case Wilkinson’s course was authorized by
224
government. Wilkinson also wrote to the secretary August 30,
225
substantially avowing his object to be what Hampton supposed: —
“You have copies of my letters to Major-General Hampton,

which I know he has received, yet I have no answer. The
reflection which naturally occurs is that if I am authorized to
command he is bound to obey; and if he will not respect the
obligation, he should be turned out of the service.”
Armstrong pacified Hampton by promising once more that all his

orders and reports should pass through the Department. Hampton
promised to serve cordially and vigorously through the campaign, but
he believed himself intended for a sacrifice, and declared his
226
intention of resigning as soon as the campaign was ended.
Wilkinson, after having at Albany provoked this outburst, started for
Sackett’s Harbor, where he arrived August 20.
At Sackett’s Harbor Wilkinson found several general officers.
Morgan Lewis was there in command, Commodore Chauncey was
there with his fleet. Jacob Brown was also present by virtue of his
recent appointment as brigadier-general. The quartermaster-general,
Robert Swartwout, a brother of Burr’s friend who went to New
Orleans, was posted there. Wilkinson summoned these officers to a
council of war August 26, which deliberated on the different plans of
campaign proposed to it, and unanimously decided in favor of one
called by Armstrong “No. 3 of the plans proposed by the
227 228
government.” As defined in Wilkinson’s language the scheme
was—
“To rendezvous the whole of the troops on the Lake in this
vicinity, and in co-operation with our squadron to make a bold
feint upon Kingston, slip down the St. Lawrence, lock up the
enemy in our rear to starve or surrender, or oblige him to follow
us without artillery, baggage, or provisions, or eventually to lay
down his arms; to sweep the St. Lawrence of armed craft, and in
concert with the division under Major-General Hampton to take
Montreal.”
Orders were given, August 25, for providing river transport for
seven thousand men, forty field-pieces, and twenty heavy guns, to
229
be in readiness by September 15.
The proposed expedition closely imitated General Amherst’s
expedition against Montreal in 1760, with serious differences of
relative situation. After Wolfe had captured Quebec and hardly
twenty-five hundred French troops remained to defend Montreal, in
the month of July Amherst descended the river from Lake Ontario
with more than ten thousand men, chiefly British veterans, capturing
every fortified position as he went. Wilkinson’s council of war
proposed to descend the river in October or November with seven
thousand men, leaving a hostile fleet and fortresses in their rear, and
running past every fortified position to arrive in the heart of a
comparatively well populated country, held by a force greater than
their own, with Quebec to support it, while Wilkinson would have no
certain base of supplies, reinforcements, or path of escape.
Knowledge of Wilkinson’s favorite Quintus Curtius or of Armstrong’s
familiar Jomini was not required to satisfy any intelligent private,
however newly recruited, that under such circumstances the army
230
would be fortunate to escape destruction.
Wilkinson next went to Niagara, where he arrived September 4,
and where he found the army in a bad condition, with Boyd still in
command, but restrained by the President’s orders within a strict
defensive. Wilkinson remained nearly a month at Fort George
making the necessary preparations for a movement. He fell ill of
fever, but returned October 2 to Sackett’s Harbor, taking with him all
the regular troops at Niagara. At that time Chauncey again controlled
the Lake.
Secretary Armstrong also came to Sackett’s Harbor, September
5, and established the War Department at that remote point for
231
nearly two months. When Wilkinson arrived, October 2,
Armstrong’s difficulties began. Wilkinson, then fifty-six years old, was
broken by the Lake fever. “He was so much indisposed in mind and
232
body,” according to Brigadier-General Boyd, “that in any other
service he would have perhaps been superseded in his command.”
According to Wilkinson’s story, he told Secretary Armstrong that he
was incapable of commanding the army, and offered to retire from it;
but the secretary said there was no one to take his place, and he
could not be spared. In private Armstrong was believed to express
himself more bluntly, and Wilkinson was told that the secretary said:
“I would feed the old man with pap sooner than leave him
233
behind.” Wilkinson’s debility did not prevent him from giving
orders, or from becoming jealous and suspicious of every one, but
234
chiefly of Armstrong. Whatever was suggested by Armstrong was
opposed by Wilkinson. Before returning to Sackett’s Harbor, October
235
4, Wilkinson favored an attack on Kingston. On reaching
Sackett’s Harbor, finding that Armstrong also favored attacking
Kingston, Wilkinson argued “against my own judgment” in favor of
236
passing Kingston and descending upon Montreal. Ten days
afterward Armstrong changed his mind. Yeo had succeeded in
returning to Kingston, bringing reinforcements.
“He will bring with him about fifteen hundred effectives,”

237
wrote Armstrong; “and thanks to the storm and our snail-like
movements down the Lake, they will be there before we can
reach it. The manœuvre intended is lost, so far as regards
Kingston. What we now do against that place must be done by
hard blows, at some risk.”
Accordingly, October 19, Armstrong wrote to Wilkinson a letter
advising abandonment of the attack on Kingston, and an effort at
238
“grasping the safer and the greater object below.”
“I call it the safer and greater object, because at Montreal

you find the weaker place and the smaller force to encounter; at
Montreal you meet a fresh, unexhausted, efficient reinforcement
of four thousand men; at Montreal you approach your own
resources, and establish between you and them an easy and an
expeditious intercourse; at Montreal you occupy a point which
must be gained in carrying your attacks home to the purposes of
the war, and which, if seized now, will save one campaign; at
Montreal you hold a position which completely severs the
enemy’s line of operations, which shuts up the Ottawa as well as
the St. Lawrence against him, and which while it restrains all
below, withers and perishes all above itself.”
As Armstrong veered toward Montreal Wilkinson turned

decidedly toward Kingston, and wrote the same day to the secretary
239
a letter of remonstrance, closing by a significant remark:—
“Personal considerations would make me prefer a visit to

Montreal to the attack of Kingston; but before I abandon this
attack, which by my instructions I am ordered to make, it is
necessary to my justification that you should by the authority of
the President direct the operations of the army under my
command particularly against Montreal.”
The hint was strong that Wilkinson believed Armstrong to be

trying to evade responsibility, as Armstrong believed Wilkinson to be
trying to shirk it. Both insinuations were probably well-founded;
neither Armstrong nor Wilkinson expected to capture Kingston, and
still less Montreal. Wilkinson plainly said as much at the time. “I
speak conjecturally,” he wrote; “but should we surmount every
obstacle in descending the river we shall advance upon Montreal
ignorant of the force arrayed against us, and in case of misfortune,
having no retreat, the army must surrender at discretion.”
Armstrong’s conduct was more extraordinary than Wilkinson’s, and
could not be believed except on his own evidence. He not only
looked for no capture of Montreal, but before writing his letter of
October 19 to Wilkinson, he had given orders for preparing winter
quarters for the army sixty or eighty miles above Montreal, and did
240
this without informing Wilkinson. In later years he wrote: —
“Suspecting early in October, from the lateness of the

season, the inclemency of the weather, and the continued
indisposition of the commanding general, that the campaign then
in progress would terminate as it did,—‘with the disgrace of
doing nothing, but without any material diminution of physical
power,’—the Secretary of War, then at Sackett’s Harbor,
hastened to direct Major-General Hampton to employ a brigade
of militia attached to his command, in constructing as many huts
as would be sufficient to cover an army of ten thousand men
during the winter.”
The order dated October 16 and addressed to the

241
quartermaster-general, prescribed the cantonment of ten
thousand men within the limits of Canada, and plainly indicated the
secretary’s expectation that the army could not reach Montreal. In
other ways Armstrong showed the same belief more openly.
All the available troops on or near Lake Ontario were
concentrated at Sackett’s Harbor about the middle of October, and
242
did not exceed seven thousand effectives, or eight thousand men.
“I calculate on six thousand combatants,” wrote Wilkinson after
243
starting, “exclusive of Scott and Randolph, neither of whom will, I
fear, be up in season.” The army was divided into four brigades
under Generals Boyd, Swartwout, Jacob Brown, and Covington,—
the latter a Maryland man, forty-five years old, who entered the
service in 1809 as lieutenant-colonel of dragoons. The brigades of

Download Facing Campus Sexual Assault And Relationship Violence With Courage A Guide For Institutions And Clinicians On Prevention Support And Healing 1St Edition Helen W Wilson Editor online ebook texxtbook full chapter pdf

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Download Facing Campus Sexual Assault And Relationship Violence With Courage A Guide For Institutions And Clinicians On Prevention Support And Healing 1St Edition Helen W Wilson Editor online ebook texxtbook full chapter pdf

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Download Facing Campus Sexual Assault And Relationship Violence With Courage A Guide For Institutions And Clinicians On Prevention Support And Healing 1St Edition Helen W Wilson Editor online ebook texxtbook full chapter pdf

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Facing Campus Sexual Assault and

Relationship Violence with Courage: A

Sexual Violence on Campus Power Conscious Approaches to

Sexual Assault Prevention on College Campuses 1st

Healing Smoothies for Cancer Nutrition Support for

Campus Sexual Violence A State of Institutionalized

Intersectionality in Action A Guide for Faculty and

Spiritual Healing from Sexual Violence: An

Cambridge IGCSE and O Level History Workbook 2C - Depth

ACT for Anorexia Nervosa A Guide for Clinicians 1st

Facing Campus Sexual Assault and Relationship Violence With Courage

to advancing gender equity across the life span.

A Guide for Institutions and Clinicians on

A Guide for Institutions and Clinicians on

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

Positioning the Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ix

1 It’s Never Too Early, It’s Never Too Late: Fostering

2 Prevention in Primary Education: Effective

3 Prevention at the University Level: Effective

4 Navigating Through Institutional Responses

6 State of the Evidence for Treatment of Survivors

7 Unique Considerations for Graduate Students . . . 117

8 Effective Interventions for Perpetrators . . . . . . . . . 141

9 Queer Communities and Patriarchal Violence:

10 Trans and Gender-Expansive Students’

12 Culturally Specific Approaches to Sexual Assault

Pierre R. Berastain, M.Div., is an immigrant survivor of sexual violence and a

Jackson Tay Bosley, Psy.D. (he/him) is a 70-year-old, White, cisgender male

experience focused on undergraduate- and graduate-level classes in the psychol-

Vanika Chawla, M.D. (she/her) is a second-generation South Asian Canadian,

Katrina Debnam, Ph.D., M.P.H (she/her) is an assistant professor with joint

Courtney Dwyer, M.A. (she/her) is a graduate of the clinical psychology pro-

Carley J. Flanery, M.P.H, MSW (she/her) is the director of prevention educ-

Marissa Floro, Ph.D. (she/her) is an adjunct professor at the University of San

Grace Poon Ghaffari, M.A. (she/her) is a Chinese American woman, mother,

Angela Esquivel Hawkins, M.A. (she/her) is a Mexican American, queer, cis-

Christina T. Khan, M.D., Ph.D. (she/her/ella) is a second-generation Guya-

Raina V. Lamade, Ph.D. (she/her) is an assistant professor of psychology at the

Stacy L. Lin, Ph.D. (she/her) is a clinical assistant professor in the Department

work is grounded in the value of decolonizing therapy in order to improve access

Samantha Ludin, Ph.D., M.Ed. (she/her) is a White, Jewish, cisgender woman

Melissa Murphy-Pucillo, LCSW, M.P.H (she/her) is a licensed clinical social

Elliot Ruggles, LICSW, Ph.D. (he/they) holds a Ph.D. in human sexuality

Deb Schneider, LCSW, PPSC (she/they) is a master’s-level clinician and pro-

Lauren Schoenthaler, J.D. (she/her) is a senior university counsel at Stanford

Allison L. Thompson, Ph.D. (she/her) is a clinical professor in the Stanford

Helen W. Wilson, Ph.D. (she/her) is a clinical associate professor of psychiatry

Stephanie N. Wong, Ph.D. (she/her) is a licensed counseling psychologist at

Campus sexual and relationship violence (SRV) has re-

marginalized members of the community. We must acknowledge and dismantle

tems that contribute to the occurrence and effects of violence. Examples of

Chapter 2, “Prevention in Primary Education,” the authors discuss considera-

We begin with a focus on prevention, recognizing that, from a develop-

Helen W. Wilson, Ph.D.

Walking past my daughter’s room recently, I overheard the following ex-

My daughter: Stop tackling me!

More recently, in her essay “Black Girlhood, Interrupted,” Tressie McMillan

ucational programs approach consent or sexuality as emotional connections

Why Discussion of Consent and Boundaries