Hanna Stotland on the Grey Area of Sexual Assault

Segment on the Amanpour PBS show about her college counseling business. https://www.pbs.org/video/hanna-stotland-helping-men-accused-sexual-misconduct-knyjb5/

Bravo, Hanna! This was an excellent interview, both reasonable and very informative, and a real contribution to resolving a very serious problem in higher education as well as society at large.

@Hanna did a great job. She always provides interesting perspective here.

I never thought about this from the point of view that I heard Hanna articulate in this video and the earlier podcast - the fact that these accused students will be out there somewhere in our community. In some situations these accused students will not be guilty of the charges which resulted in their expulsion. But even if they are, is supporting their attempts to finish their education in the best interest of society? This has certainly given me something to ponder.

Many would say that, at least in theory, someone convicted of a crime should not be prohibited from any legal activity which does not put him/her in a situation with an elevated risk of reoffending based on conviction history, so that s/he can become a contributor to rather than a burden on society. For example, someone with DUI convictions may be subject to restrictions on driving and/or alcohol, but should not be excluded from taking jobs where driving is not part of the job and alcohol is not present.

However, probably as a result of the crime wave a generation ago, many people apparently believe that any conviction for any misdemeanor or felony means that the person is highly dangerous in all circumstances, so that they are unwilling to consider someone with such a conviction for legal activity such at attending school or working at an honest job, even when there is no indication that there will be an increased risk of reoffending.

Of course, even without such exaggerated fears, there can be areas of disagreement or areas that are difficult to delineate. For example, if someone were convicted of drugging someone else, the increased risk of reoffending would be at certain types of parties common around residential college campuses, rather than attendance at a college per se. But how does a college handle that when considering whether to admit an applicant with such a record? Especially if the college is more residential.

Great interview. @Hanna is very articulate and makes sense. I thought her last point, about believing, was particularly important.

Hanna: this was impressive and very helpful to me in understanding some of your posts. If you have an essay someplace that explores some of the topics you discussed in greater depth, I would really like to read it.

You’ve been on cc almost as long as I’ve been here, and are one of my favorite posters. Now I’m wondering where you were in your educational journey when you joined cc.

Excellent and on point as always Hanna.

@hanna, great interview! You do good work and it shows!

There are a lot of students who need help in getting into best colleges they could get into. I do wonder if the resource could be better spent in helping students who are homeless, from abusive parents, low income…I watched the interview and Hanna was very articulate. I am sure Hanna also work with other student, but her time is still limited, so why take on so many students with “issues,” whether it is sexual assault or “acting unkindly,” or “intoxicated.” I do see it as some wealthy parents who could afford a consultant to help their kid to get off some offense.

Well reasoned and articulated. Nice to see in this day and age. Way to go.

Straight Fs to Harvard – gotta love it.

As a practical matter, unless the college admissions consultant has entered the capitalist class (i.e. no longer needs any income from his/her labor to live on), the consultant needs paying customers to pay the bills. S/he may be able to individually help a few of the “homeless, from abusive parents, low income…” customers on a pro-bono basis, but still needs paying customers to provide his/her own income. This is similar to how some private colleges give good financial aid to a few students from low income families, but keep the number of such students limited while enrolling far more students from wealthy families because they have to stay within financial aid budgets.

You left out a few steps:

Straight Fs in high school to GED to work to unnamed college (presumably earning top-end grades for two years) to Harvard.

Fabulous interveiw, and very informative.

Thanks, everyone!

@alh, I was already a lawyer when I joined CC. Back in the '90s I was on the old Princeton Review discussion board, which I think was the first web-based admission discussion site.

@oldfort “why take on so many students with “issues”?”
Because I am uniquely suited to help them, and in many cases, the only consultant willing to help them. You might ask a drug counselor why they take on so many clients with “issues.” They do it because that’s who needs their help. This is a question the interviewer and I spent some time on, but it didn’t make the broadcast.

@ucbalumnus, a student CONVICTED of drugging someone else is not getting into a residential college, and likely not into college period, because they are probably a registered sex offender and a felon. Most of my students, though, have not even been arrested, much less charged with or convicted of anything. (Also: the interim college was Bryn Mawr.)

Happy to answer any other questions.

I too was wondering why anyone would attack Hanna for taking on “so many students with issues.” Because that’s what she does for a living? Might just as well ask anyone why they don’t quit their job and go to India to help the poorest of the poor.

I thought Hanna was a private college counselor, didn’t realize what she does for a living was to help students with issues. My question was why focus on students with sexual assault records, and not on other students? It may be those students are willing to pay more than other students or it may be Hanna has a soft spot for those type of students and doing it as pro bono, and if so, why not do it for kids who may be “more deserving.” It wasn’t covered during the interview.
No need to get snippy.

@hanna. I would love to hear more about your journey from high school to Brn Mawr. I was a terrible student early in high schooland then had a transformation my junior year and got straight As. This was mostly due to maturing and being willing to work harder. What happened to you after you left high school to change your direction?

@oldfort – Hanna has a specialty. It is something she is good at, and probably gets a lot of her clientele by word of mouth or through referrals from other counselors who either don’t want to deal with her clientele or don’t have the first clue of how to help. And if you actually have listened to her interview, you’d know that the facts in most of these cases are ambiguous, he-said, she-said settings where both parties were voluntarily intoxicated — not forcible rape, not cases resulting in criminal convictions. The standard of proof in college disciplinary settings is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt – and the rights afforded to the accused student falls far short of what he would get or be entitled to in a court of law. Many of her clients deny the allegations that were made against them. Sometimes accusations are false. Sometimes the memories of intoxicated people are inaccurate.

Or absent.

And that can make it difficult for third parties (whether university discipline or law enforcement and courts) to get the correct answer out of an incident where consent is questioned due to the influence of alcohol.

Depending on how the college defines consent, a complete inability to remember events or being blackout drunk would itself be proof of an inability to consent.