Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Welcome to The 1909, the podcast that takes an in-depth look at The State News’ biggest stories of the week, while bringing in new perspectives from the reporters who wrote them.
It's Wednesday, November 27th, and this is the 1909, the state news weekly podcast featuring our reporters talking about the news. I'm your host, Alex Walters. This week, an ongoing Department of Education investigation has Michigan State defending its handling of sexual assault allegations at the campus clinic. This is a lengthy story, but a very important one, so I thought I would commandeer today's 19 09 to read it. I sometimes prefer to listen to audio versions of long articles, and I figure at least a few of you do too.
Alex:So I've made a few minor edits to this story so it makes a little more sense in this spoken format. But, otherwise, what you're about to hear is just our story read by me, its author. For years, Michigan State University has insisted that its handling of sexual abuse claims has greatly improved since the Larry Nassar scandal, but it seems the Department of Education isn't so convinced. The federal overseer tasked with ensuring gender equity on college campuses is investigating MSU for allegedly mishandling reports of sexual assault by a practitioner at its campus clinic and discriminating against one of the women who reported him. The probe puts the university in an especially uncomfortable position, once again defending itself amid allegations of sexual misconduct by one of its health care providers.
Alex:Cases of sexual violence under the guise of medical treatment are difficult for any institution to navigate according to experts I talked to for this story. A power imbalance covers every interaction between providers and patients, and it can be extremely hard to decisively say where medicine ended and abuse began. But the issue is especially thorny here at MSU, an institution that was widely criticized for mishandling claims of sexual abuse by Nassar, its now disgraced former doctor who assaulted hundreds of patients at his campus office. Critics argued that Nassar was allowed to continue his exploits because of failings at MSU's processes, which either ignored accusations or cleared Nassar of wrongdoing. In the years since, the university has attempted to convince skeptics that Nassar was an isolated issue that can't happen again.
Alex:But the allegations being considered in this new federal investigation and others uncovered by the state news complicate that narrative. We first reported the existence of this federal probe more than a year ago using heavily redacted documents that told us only that an investigation existed. Now the MSU graduate who filed the complaint has shared her story in hundreds of pages of documents with me, shedding light on the MSU investigation at the heart of the department's inquiry. Her account is also supported by additional reporting and dozens of other documents obtained through public records requests. And you might ask, why is she sharing so much, especially as the federal government's investigation is still ongoing?
Alex:And what she said is that because if she had known from the beginning what MSU's investigation would be like, she may have never reported to the university at all. She told me that, quote, my goal with all of this is so people have more information about the process and can make a more informed decision. Because looking back now, I certainly didn't have that going in, said the student, who I will only be identifying by her middle name, Elizabeth. Part 1, making the allegation. Almost 3 years ago, when Elizabeth first reported to MSU, she saw things very differently.
Alex:She had followed the news about past sexual violence issues at the university. She had heard MSU's official line on its ever improving title 9 system, and Elizabeth believed that her studies, which related to the sorts of issues and processes in title 9 cases, would prepare her for the process. So in February 2022, when she was a student, she filed a report with MSU's Office of Institutional Equity, which conducts title 9 investigations. She told them that she had been assaulted during an appointment days earlier at the university's campus clinic, the Olin Health Center. The first step was creating a formal complaint.
Alex:Elizabeth was interviewed by a title 9 investigator, then that person turned the interview into a written third person narrative. She and the investigator went back and forth on that language until Elizabeth felt comfortable signing the document. The disagreements that arose between Elizabeth and the investigation over which details were include were kind of the first real frustration in this lengthy process, she told me. The state news reviewed a copy of the formal complaint. It said that the way the practitioner touched Elizabeth felt intentionally affectionate, not treatment oriented, leading her to question whether it was appropriate.
Alex:It also described a moment of arousal she experienced, which further convinced her that something was amiss, And it detailed how she struggled to get up off the table during the alleged assault. It also detailed a series of comments made by the practitioner that left her feeling uncomfortable. At one point, as his arms were wrapped around her, the practitioner said, hey, look. You're getting your hugs for the weekend, the complaint said. When she mistakenly thought a treatment was over and began to stand up, he told her, you can get up when I say you can get up.
Alex:Then when the appointment actually was over, he said, okay. Do your exercises, or else I will have to do that again. Elizabeth's statements to investigators describe the experience as humiliating, saying that she had to work through a sense of shame surrounding the arousal, eventually coming to terms with the fact that it was only a response to the physical sensation, not a signal of desire or acceptance. The statements also included details from the weeks after the appointment, saying that she struggled to sleep and focus in school, suffered panic attacks, and had a visceral flashback to the appointment. Elizabeth signed her formal complaint in March, officially starting the investigation.
Alex:The title 9's office next step was alerting the practitioner and soliciting his response. In a written statement, he denied the allegations, writing that it was a normal treatment session. The practitioner said he did not recall details of the appointment, but that if what Elizabeth alleged did occur, it could have all been explained away. He said the maneuver she described could have been part of legitimate medical treatment, and the comments were just a manifestation of his effort to, quote, have a casual, lighthearted treatment session. He wrote that in his decades long career, he had never before been accused of behaving inappropriately toward a patient.
Alex:That wasn't true. As police reports show, he was accused of assaulting another patient 2 years before and had used the same defense. The state news is not identifying the practitioner or his medical discipline because he has not been found responsible for misconduct in university investigations or charged with the crime. Reached by email, he told the state news that, quote, this was a traumatic time in my life, and I will not be adding further comments. Part 2, MSU seeks an expert.
Alex:After receiving the statements from both parties, MSU's investigator chose to ask an expert in the practitioner's medical discipline to write a report interpreting them. The use of experts in an accused actor's field became a point of contention for MSU amid the widespread criticism of its handling of Nassar's serial abuse. The university infamously cleared Nassar of wrongdoing in a 2014 title 9 investigation, relying on statements from experts in his field who said that everything Nassar did was part of legitimate medical treatment. Those experts, however, were colleagues of Nassar. In Elizabeth's case, MSU used an expert outside the university.
Alex:The expert's report said that the conduct described could all be part of normal medical treatment. It noted that the practitioner could have communicated more clearly so that Elizabeth would, quote, accept the treatment from the practitioner without question. The report practitioner without question. The report also minimized the comments that made Elizabeth uncomfortable. The expert questioned her for reporting them to MSU because she did not voice any concern to the practitioner in the moment.
Alex:There is also a dispute over the expert's discussion of Elizabeth's clothing being partially removed. Elizabeth's formal complaint said that the practitioner stated it would be easier if he could roll down her pants a bit. Then the complaint moved on to describing the rest of the appointment. It doesn't mention the pants again. The practitioner also briefly addresses this in his statement, saying he did not remember her pants being lowered.
Alex:He goes on to say that if her pants were rolled down, it would have been part of his treatment. The expert, however, distorted this discussion, making an assertion that Elizabeth rolled down her own pants and thus consented to later actions she alleged. The report said, quote, since claimant rolled her own pants down, the respondent likely assumed that the claimant was given permission to perform one of the ensuing treatments that made Elizabeth uncomfortable. Experts in title 9 cases like Elizabeth don't have to follow the same rules of evidence that govern expert testimony in criminal proceedings, said Nicole Badera, a sociologist who studies title 9 investigations and did her PhD dissertation at the University of Michigan on the practice. If a case like this occurred in a courtroom, for example, an expert would only be able to speak to the actual medical questions, Bedera said.
Alex:But in title 9 cases, experts sometimes make sweeping judgments about informed consent or sexual violence despite lacking expertise or experience in those concepts, said Badera, who recently published a book about title 9 investigations. MSU also sought to add Elizabeth's unrelated medical records to the pool of evidence being used to evaluate the case, bringing about further disputes. When Elizabeth signed a HIPAA release allowing medical documents to be included in the case file, she thought it would only be the notes on the appointment in question, she said. Instead, MSU added her entire medical file, including notes on conditions and treatments unrelated to the matter at hand. That included unrelated medical information, which Elizabeth believed could prejudice the investigator and eventual resolution officer against her.
Alex:She protested, and MSU eventually redacted the unrelated information in her medical file. It's common for universities to attempt to cloud investigations with lengthy additions of nonessential evidence, said Badera. In cases she studied for her book, she notes that investigators muddied issues and created needless contention. Part 3, a grueling hearing. At the end of the evidence gathering phase of the process, an MSU investigator was responsible for deciding how the case should move forward.
Alex:In Elizabeth's case, the investigator concluded that if true, what she alleged would fall under the university's definition of sexual harassment and nonconsensual sexual contact. But the investigator decided that Elizabeth's, quote, credibility is at issue, so further review was required. The investigator recommended that a live hearing be conducted before an outside resolution officer was asked to make the final judgment. Such hearings seek to replicate parts of the criminal legal process with testimony of various witnesses and each party being cross examined. They're a core component of the first Trump administration's controversial title 9 rules, which sought to increase protections for the accused.
Alex:The rules, which were announced in 2020, added a requirement of live hearings and cross examinations. That mandate was commended by some who view hearings as an important due process protection for the accused, but criticized by others who say live hearings re traumatize survivors and greatly delay even simple cases. In new rules announced earlier this year, the Biden administration got rid of the live hearing requirement, allowing colleges to choose when and whether to use them. MSU, however, has not dropped its live hearing requirement because of legal challenges to Biden's new rules brought by Republican state officials, said spokesperson Emily Garand. It's unclear if Trump will bring back the live hearing requirement during his second term.
Alex:His transition team did not respond to request for comment, and his official platform says only that he will, quote, reverse Biden's radical rewrite of title 9 to end left wing gender insanity. At Elizabeth's live hearing, she was questioned for over 3 hours. Throughout the questioning, her adviser voiced concerns about the lengthy, aggressive process via Microsoft Teams messages. This is not how we treat individuals in this process, Elizabeth's adviser said in one of the messages, which were included in her case file. This is a concern going forward.
Alex:In the messages, she noted that the practitioner's adviser was being highly antagonistic, making eye rolls after almost every question and negative comments when Elizabeth opted not to answer certain probing questions. Despite her adviser's concerns, the hearing officer allowed the abrasive questioning to continue. Elizabeth said she felt like she was in the room with 2 additional bullies with the hearing adviser and practitioner's adviser. These lawyers come in and treat it like a court hearing, she said. When the hearing officer questioned for her for 82 minutes, Elizabeth said she asked herself, is she just unprepared, or is she trying to get back at me?
Alex:I wondered if it was vindictive, she said. The practitioner was also questioned at the hearing, though not for as long. During his portion, he repeated his defense. He did not recall details of the appointment, but believes everything described was part of legitimate treatment. The hearing also included testimony from another Olin employee who was working nearby during Elizabeth's appointment.
Alex:That person said they did not remember anything concerning, but was busy with other patients and thus could not have seen or heard every interaction between Elizabeth and the practitioner. Part 4, MSU's decision. After the hearing, a decision in Elizabeth's case was made by a resolution officer, someone outside the university who reviews all the evidence, watches the hearing, and then decides if the accused is found responsible for the conduct. Elizabeth's case was handled by Laura g Anthony, a Columbus, Ohio attorney. Anthony concluded that there was not evidence to support a finding that the practitioner engaged in nonconsensual sexual touching because Elizabeth was not credible, she said.
Alex:A credibility determination conducted by Anthony calls Elizabeth's account inconsistent because she included certain details in her later statements to investigators and during the hearing, which weren't in her initial formal complaint. That practice, assessing the credibility of a claimant by comparing their various statements to investigators, sometimes made months apart, is a subject of controversy. Experts in trauma psychology have argued that such judgments are unscientific and ignore what's understood about the different ways traumatic memories are stored or retrieved. The credibility determination also took issue with some of the material of Elizabeth's retelling itself. Take, for example, Elizabeth's claim that she moaned and struggled to get off the table.
Alex:Anthony writes that it would be impossible for that to have happened without someone else noticing despite the one witness saying they were with another patient and not paying attention. The practitioner, conversely, is credible according to Anthony. She said he was consistent internally and externally with his repetition that he didn't remember the appointment and wouldn't do what was alleged. The decision disputes Elizabeth's allegation that the practitioner engaged in sexual harassment with the comments that made her uncomfortable. Anthony writes that it's possible Elizabeth found the comments subjectively offensive, but that, quote, an objective person would not be offended by those comments.
Alex:Elizabeth appealed Anthony's decision to a second resolution officer, a step allowed by MSU title line policy and offered to claimants and respondents. In her appeal, she questioned the credibility assessment. The practitioner said in the hearing that he saw 7 to 10 patients a day and did not have a direct recollection of the specific instances. How then, Elizabeth argued, could his account be credible? She also pointed out that the witness, who was supposedly supporting the practitioner's account, stressed in the hearing that they did not have a direct recollection.
Alex:The appeal also takes issues with the hours long aggressive questioning at the hearing. The ordeal was not trauma informed to such a degree that it was prejudicial against the claimant for testifying. She argued her appeal. The appeal was then reviewed by Aslan Sapp, an MSU employee tasked with making those final decisions. Ultimately, she denied it.
Alex:Sapp's December 2022 decision acknowledges many of Elizabeth's concerns, but suggests they are broader issues than what can be addressed in an individual appeal. The case can be overturned on appeal if there was a misapplication of MSU's policies. Elizabeth, however, was criticizing the policies themselves as Sapp sees it. With the hearing, for example, Sapp writes that she agrees that the total length of time questioning Elizabeth is of concern, but she doesn't see a misapplication of policy or anything that would have changed the decision. Sapp writes, quote, there is nothing in the policy or hearing procedures that expressly requires a hearing to be trauma informed.
Alex:That admission undercuts MSU's recent attempts to convince critics that investigations are conducted in ways that won't further hurt or retraumatize survivors. The training used by title 9 staff describes investigations as trauma informed, and the office's most recent annual report says that it strives to conduct investigations in a trauma informed manner. Durant, the MSU spokesperson, said that SAP was making a factual statement about hearing policy, which did not capture the university's overall philosophy and approach. Grant said, quote, recognizing the trauma of those impacted by these situations and promoting an environment of healing can still exist without a formal policy. Sapp's decision similarly directs the appeal's issues with the credibility assessment.
Alex:Elizabeth may have objections with the reasoning in the decision, but MSU's policies give resolution officers broad discretion to determine what evidence is relevant and what weight it's given, Sapp argues. With that, MSU's decision was set. The practitioner was not fined responsible for either the sexual harassment or nonconsensual sexual touching. The case was then referred to MSU's board of trustees for certification, a formal attestation that university leaders are aware of reported sexual misconduct by employees. The process is required by state laws created in reaction to the Nassar case.
Alex:In March of 2023, then a trustee, now chair Dan Kelly, certified Elizabeth's case according to emails obtained through public records requests. Part 5, a clarity with police. For Elizabeth, the depths of the failings of the title 9 process weren't entirely clear until she reported the same incident to MSU's police department and had a vastly more positive experience. Historically, survivors of sexual violence have feared reporting to police. Law enforcement agencies often mishandle cases or retraumatize survivors.
Alex:Title 9 investigations are often advertised as less stressful or more accommodating of survivors. The two systems also operate under different burdens of proof. In the criminal system, offenses must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. But in title 9, offenses only need to be proven to have more likely than not occurred. But Elizabeth's experience doesn't square with that conventional knowledge.
Alex:Though the end result was the same, she said reporting to law enforcement was far less stressful than MSU's title 9 process. With the police, all she had to do was report what happened, then a trained detective did all the investigating. With MSU's process, Elizabeth had to not only report what happened, but craft the formal statements describing it, collect the relevant evidence, and argue her case. She had an adviser, but she knew it would all stop if she didn't persist. It felt like the onus was on her to solve the issue.
Alex:Certain people in MSU's process seemed interested in creating accountability for perpetrators, like a caring adviser, dedicated support person, but Elizabeth said it felt like it was on her to actually do that. Sometimes she thought about it as an issue of cost and benefit. Universities may wanna remove employees who victimize others, but it's survivors that are bearing the cost. They are retraumatized and burdened by a grueling process to make that happen, Elizabeth said. They need you in order to get these people out, she said.
Alex:Sometimes I felt like I was being treated as a tool. If she could do it all again, Elizabeth said she would have first reported to police and may have skipped MSU's title 9 process. And she's not alone, said Badera, the sociologist who studies campus sexual violence. Title 9 investigation is largely a misnomer according to Badera because it's the involved parties that collect the evidence and build the cases, not the university. The investigator is actually more of a evidence receiver and organizer, she said.
Alex:They put it all on the claimant, Badera said. Schools say, bring it to me the right way and put it directly in front of me. You have to do all the work. And if you don't do it correctly, they'll pretend nothing happened. Some have caught on to this and began utilizing the different systems to their In a case Badera studied for her book, a survivor chose to first report to police and allow a detective to conduct an investigation.
Alex:Then she reported to the university using the evidence collected by the police, which eased the burden on her in the title line process. In a purely pragmatic sense, Badera said that may be a keen way to get some of the benefits of both systems. But she said it really demonstrates how broken university's methods may be. That survivor said that the university process seemed worse than being interrogated by a white male police officer, Bedera said. To her, that's a real indictment.
Alex:Part 6, previous allegations. It appears that the posture Bedera described played out in other allegations against the same practitioner. 2 years before Elizabeth incident, another patient made similar claims, but chose to only cooperate with a police investigation, declining invitations from the university to participate in the title 9 process. A police report shows that in January of 2020, an MSU student told officers that she believed she was sexually assaulted by the practitioner during an appointment at Olin. The student told police she began to question the treatment as she noticed the practitioner would vary the forcefulness and nature of his touch depending on if others were in the room, according to a copy of the police report obtained through a public records request.
Alex:I know how it is, the victim told police. He'll try and touch me in certain ways and look at me provocatively when we're alone, but the moment another adult comes, he'll act professional. She began to feel relief each time someone walked by and then dread as she realized, oh my god. This is happening again when the other person left, according to the police report. The police interviewed the practitioner who denied the characterization and then hired an outside expert to evaluate the allegations.
Alex:The expert's eventual report concluded that the practitioner's action could be part of legitimate medical treatment, but that something was amiss if the patient was left feeling like the practitioner was getting sexual gratification from it. The expert theorized that the cause was a miscommunication failure according to a copy of his report included in the police file. The police sought input from the same expert years later in Elizabeth's case. In that matter, he expressed deeper doubts. What happened could have been another communication failure, the expert wrote, but he concluded that he could not rule out the possibility of inappropriate behavior or actions because of Elizabeth's description of arousal.
Alex:The central response by the patient is not fully explained to this consultant satisfaction, he wrote in his report, which the state news obtained through a public records request. The police's expert also differs from MSU's in his discussion of Elizabeth's clothing. MSU's expert asserted that Elizabeth consented to parts of the treatment because of the seemingly unsupported assertion that she lowered her pants when asked. The police's expert, conversely, says that there wasn't a medical reason to lower pants at all according to her view of the statements and medical records of the appointment that he conducted. Both the 2020 police investigation and Elizabeth's case were forwarded to the Ingham County prosecutor for charges, but the requests were ultimately denied because there was not sufficient evidence to pursue criminal charges, prosecutor John Duane said in an email to the state news.
Alex:The 2020 case also never went through a title 9 process. The university opened an investigation when the patient made a report to police but closed it because the accuser did not want to participate according to documents obtained through public records requests. It's possible for MSU to carry out a title 9 investigation without an accuser's participation, but it's rare and it can be difficult. Though the university didn't carry out a title 9 investigation, the report did eventually trigger information sharing within MSU's administration, thanks to a new state law. The law was passed in the wake of the Nassar scandal and requires a university's title 9 staff to notify leaders when an employer is accused of sexual misconduct more than once.
Alex:So MSU's board of trustees and its then president, Sam Stanley, were made aware of the cases against the practitioner in May 2022 according to emails obtained through public records request. It's unclear if that information was discussed by the board and Stanley at the time. Garand, the spokesperson, said she's not aware of any discussion. During the title 9 process, Elizabeth wasn't told that the board and president were alerted about her case, she said, or that a trustee would end up certifying the final decision. She only found out when the state news asked her about it.
Alex:Elizabeth said that it made her think about a series of victim blaming texts exchanged by former trustee Pat O'Keefe and current trustee Reamer Vassar, which were published in news reports last year. I'm cringing thinking about the text messages, she said. What did they say about me? I don't even wanna know. Part 7, the feds examine MSU.
Alex:In September of 2022, as Elizabeth awaited a hearing and decision in her title 9 case, she felt the weight of the world on her shoulders. So she filed a complaint with the Department of Education, hoping it would look into MSU's handling of her case. Soon after MSU's decision, the university received a letter from the department's office for civil rights. It said the department plans to investigate MSU for possibly mishandling the allegations against the practitioner and potentially engaging in disability discrimination with the errant inclusion of Elizabeth's unrelated medical records. The letter said the department was also investigating further allegations that Elizabeth's education at MSU was hindered in retaliation for her reporting of the practitioner.
Alex:Elizabeth declined to speak in detail about that issue because it was within her degree program and could reveal her identity. The federal investigation represents an eventful turn in Elizabeth's case, but isn't altogether unusual. Universities like MSU are empowered to investigate and discipline issues of sexual violence under title 9. The federal government's investigations are sort of a check to that power, evaluating the ways that colleges conduct investigations when parties voice concerns. In the last decade, MSU has entered into 2 major resolution agreements with the department.
Alex:Those deals are one way the investigations end with universities agreeing to a list of required reforms. In 2015, the university agreed to expand its civil line office and improve efficiency after the department found that MSU failed to inform students of their rights under the statute and moved egregiously slow when investigating cases. Then in 2019, MSU agreed to pay a $4,500,000 fine and create new information sharing policies after a department investigation found that the university reportedly ignored reports of Nassar's abuse and failed to properly investigate the ones they considered. MSU is still working to adopt those recommendations. And earlier this year, the university paid another nearly $3,000,000 fine for failing to follow through on some of them.
Alex:Other department investigations into MSU have ended with more straightforward findings against the university or with a dismissal of the complaint altogether, said Gerhardt, the MSU spokesperson. Elizabeth's case is only one of 7 complaints about MSU's handling of title 9 that the department is currently investigating. Grant said the university continues to comply and cooperate with each one. Such investigations are often quite broad. The department doesn't necessarily investigate, for example, an individual accusation that someone committed sexual misconduct.
Alex:Rather, they tend to look at how an institution's investigative practices or systemic issues allowed abuse to occur. Their inquiries may start with a single case but attempt to find patterns and practices that violate various civil rights rules. The Office For Civil Rights' most annual report describes various ways that an investigation into one case can widen to examine broader institutional problems. Where there's a problem with 1 student, that may be an indicator that there's an issue with the way the institution handles these kinds of issues in general, said one attorney quoted in the report. Part 8, a troubling trend.
Alex:That broad lens puts MSU in an especially uncomfortable position with Elizabeth's case, forced to once again defend itself amid allegations of sexual misconduct by a university health care provider. Those cases are difficult for any institution. A deep power imbalance makes the field ripe for abuse. Patients sometimes go along with things that make them uncomfortable because there's a sense of power and authority from someone in a medical setting, said Sheridan Miyamoto, a professor at Penn State University who researches sexual violence in health care. They don't always know where the line is blurred, only that something doesn't feel right, she said.
Alex:Investigating those cases then presents challenges that aren't there in other sexual violence cases. Much of medicine is inherently intimate, said Jay Wesley Boyd, director of education at Harvard Medical School's Center For Bioethics. Even the best investigative processes can struggle to determine where medicine ends and abuse begins. There's no other setting where a stranger is going to ask you to disrobe and be able to put their hands on you, and it's considered absolutely appropriate, Boyd said. Much of what happens in medical settings would be completely inappropriate outside of them.
Alex:If you have predatory doctors, they exploit that, said Boyd, who has treated abusive doctors as a psychiatrist and acted as an expert witness in medical malpractice lawsuits. MSU has tried to say Nassar was one example of that troubling trend, an outlier that can't happen again. But Nassar is by no means the only MSU health care provider accused of sexual misconduct in recent years. In fact, there are at least 5 reported cases. There is the practitioner in Elizabeth's case, a university physical therapist who is accused of sexually assaulting a patient in a different 2023 lawsuit, and there's an MSU medical resident who is convicted of sexually assaulting patients in 2019.
Alex:The state news also find allegations of sexual assault by 2 other current MSU doctors. 1 was accused of groping 2 separate patients in 2017 and 2018 according to police reports and emails obtained through public records requests. The other was accused of assaulting a patient while working at a local hospital in a 2017 lawsuit. It's unclear what's being examined in the department's current investigation of MSU. The state news obtained its case file through a public records request, but the department completely redacted the vast majority of the pages.
Alex:The few that were left unredacted or partially redacted were mostly cover pages and lengthy email signatures, lacking any significant information. The department does not comment on open investigations, a spokesperson told the state news, saying that several factors impact how long it can take to resolve a complaint, including resource constraints, school responsiveness, or witness availability. And the recent Office For Civil Rights report suggests the department's investigators are woefully overwhelmed with the skyrocketing number of cases and stagnant staffing. It's also unclear how the office or its current investigations will be affected by Trump's plan to close the Department of Education. Project 2025, a controversial political playbook written by former Trump administration officials, suggests preserving the office, but making it part of the Department of Justice.
Alex:Part 9. Elizabeth wants change. Whatever the outcome, Elizabeth said she hopes MSU will reflect on her experience and further reform its processes. With or without prompting from the department, she said the university has work to do before no one has to be afraid to see a doctor on that campus. MSU largely declined to comment on Elizabeth's assertions.
Alex:Garand, the spokesperson, did partially answer a list of written questions from the state news in an emailed statement. Broadly, she said that our goal in all investigations and all situations is to treat everyone involved with respect and care. In the years since the February 2022 appointment, Elizabeth said she's had to do a lot to deal with the effects of what he did. By telling her story publicly and making her demands known, Elizabeth hopes MSU will be forced to do the same. I had to get better, she said.
Alex:Now it's the university's choice whether they wanna do the same thing for themselves. One step would be funding academic research of the unique issue of sexual misconduct in medicine, Elizabeth suggested. There is a growing body of studies examining the problem. Making more of them might be a way for the university to show that it's taking some ownership of the issue, she said. In recent years, MSU has made major investments in the scholarship of health equity with the new Charles Stewart Mott Department of Public Health in Flint and its recent inaugural MSU Health Equity Symposium.
Alex:Those both focused on health equity along racial and geographic lines, but Elizabeth suggested the future work could be focused on eliminating sexual violence and health care as part of that broader mission. Another suggestion, MSU could simply be more upfront about title 9 investigations, Elizabeth said, even if the eventual outcome was exactly the same. She said her experience could have been improved if she knew from the start about the long wait times, burdensome evidence gathering, grueling hearing process, and multiple times she would be made to rehash each traumatic detail of her allegations. Nothing can prepare you for this, she said. MSU advertises its title 9 office as much improved since the days of Nassar.
Alex:It calls the office trauma informed. But as the university equity review officer wrote in the decision in Elizabeth's case, the policies themselves don't always require that. Elizabeth said she hopes that her choice to publicly detail her interactions with the university will help others make more informed choices about reporting. I'm not looking to be like the standard bearer of this issue, Elizabeth said. I don't wanna hold this mantle ever again.
Alex:Well, that's all for this week. The written version of this article and plenty more great stories are available at statenews.com. If you've listened this far and think there's something more we should know or another story we should tell, I'd encourage you to get in touch. Tips from people who know things or just insightful suggestions from close readers are what makes stories like this possible. You can always reach me at alex.walters@statenews dotcom, or call or text me at 248-979-5497.
Alex:And finally, I'd like to thank my editor on this story, Amalia Medina, the editor of this podcast, Taylor Ochoa, and most of all, thank you for listening. For the 19 0 9, I'm Alex Walters.