The legal and moral-ethical aspect of teacher-student relations

For the umpteenth time, an affair between a teacher and a student once again reached the headlines of the newspapers and social networks storming the endless debate. Since many things repeat themselves and are not necessarily factually correct, I decided to come down on the record below.

First, I will address the legal aspect.

The existence of sexual relations in the framework of relations of authority is not prohibited categorically . Yes, you read it right.

The relevant law is Section 346 (b) of the Penal Law - "Where a woman who has attained the age of eighteen years exploits authority in labor relations or in service or due to a false promise of marriage by impersonating him despite being married, shall be liable to imprisonment for three years."

To clarify - in my opinion this section should be deleted after the respect of the number of laws. But, unfortunately, at the moment it is still there and humiliating women by virtue of it, and therefore it is only to analyze it.

It is easy to see that according to the language of the law, the very existence of a relationship of authority at work or in service is not sufficient to constitute a "prohibited prohibition on consent." It is necessary to take advantage of these.

Some will argue, including former Supreme Court President Dorit Beinish, that the correct purposeful interpretation is that if there is a relationship of authority then there is also exploitation of these. The latter also tried to set such a rule in the hearing of the petition against the plea bargain with Katsav, but remained in a minority opinion (along with the late Edmund Levy, someone surprised?) Of 5 against 2.

In practice, the ruling recognized the tests whether or not it was exploitation.

For example, do sexual encounters take place only in the context of work or in work-related situations, or even outside the framework of work?

For example, is this a "common-law" novel?

Sounds silly to you that if the sex was on the desk in the office it is illegal but if in a hotel room regardless of work is it legal? Your'e right. It's really stupid. Foolish rules give rise to silly practices.

As can be seen from the above quote, "student-teacher" relations are not relevant to the above law, since it is not a "relationship of authority over work or service." What can be known as "authority relations at work" may be guided-guiding relations, Certainly, a student who is studying a course of a particular lecturer does not work for him, and some will argue that just the opposite.

Which law, then, may be relevant? You guessed it - Orit Kamir's "The Law to Prevent Sexual Harassment."

What do I think of this law? You are sure that you will be able to guess correctly in light of the above, but, unfortunately, he is still there and humiliates women by virtue of his being (even if at least in contrast to his predecessor written in a neutral language).

The sexual harassment that may be relevant in the above case is the one described in sections 3 (a) (3-4) of the Law:

Repeated offers of a sexual nature addressed to a person who has shown the harasser that he is not interested in the said proposals;

Repeated references to a person who focus on his sexuality when that person has shown to the harasser that he is not interested in the said references;

However, section 3 (a) (6) of the law exempts that person from showing the harasser that he is not interested in the same proposals or references in a number of situations. The relevant is 3 (a) (6) (e):

To a student or student who studies in an institution that provides academic, religious or professional education to graduates (in this law - an institution for the education of adults), while taking advantage of the relationship of authority in studies;

(3) (a) (6) does not prohibit the said proposals or references when that person is interested in them, but only exempts that person from the need to show that he is not interested in order to be considered sexual harassment.

It is clear that this section is not relevant to the case at hand, since the student does not claim that she was not interested and refrained from showing this bitter conversion , but admits that agreed and wanted .

The criminal law, and past experience, at least to the best of my knowledge and knowledge, proves that even when complaints are filed with the police about a "prohibited relationship" between a lecturer and a student, even when there is no dispute or attempt to deny that such exist, they do not mature into any indictment, When this is a guided-guiding relationship.

I assume from the analysis above my opinion is clear - relationships between adults agree to the world should be completely legal. Everything else, makes that adult agrees to a kind of "helpless", and more than anything else humiliates and humiliates him. But criminal law is not all about morality, ethics?

I will begin with the ethics of the student (who in this case is not a young woman in her 20s, but a 45-year-old woman, divorced with children, who can only guess what false complaints her ex-husband had eaten). A woman (or man, of course, but somehow in these cases is always a woman) is a mature woman who has sex with her own free will, and later decides that her will is not really supposed to be considered a desire that the class "charmed her" and decides to act against him To remove Darbano Tam. I will not call one such a "whore," because prostitutes are women who work very hard to make a living in a very Sisyphean work, and do not harm anyone and so do not be insulted and compared to such relaxation. In my fantasy, one of them bears a sign of Cain on the forehead, so that every possible male knows how to guard himself from her face.

Where does academic ethics come in here? Well, academic ethics should be interested in the fact that this student will not win the right of this novel to the profits of an academic party that does not really reach it.

In an amended world, the ethics committee at the same academic institution would act as the Commissioner for the Prevention of Sexual Harassment with Ortal Ben Dayan, and turn the student's face blankly on the charge of sexual harassment, and make it clear to her that if she wishes, she bears responsibility for it as an adult. The Ethics Committee would have focused on whether the lecturer had actually offered her a seminar paper for her to drop. If so, he must be denounced throughout the academic world, and certainly lose his job. And if the student agreed to such an offer - she should also be removed from the institution.

There are those who argue that in such a situation, a lecturer will give preferential treatment, even without intention, and without doing so explicitly and explicitly. While I do not reject this claim completely, I do believe that this should not be expressed in the ethical code of an academic institution. After all, a lecturer can teach and give grades to a member of his family. Moreover, a faculty member who instructs a master or doctorate student has a higher interest that the student will be considered by the university as successful in his work, because the faculty member is directly compensated for this , especially if he is still only a lecturer or a senior lecturer and not a full professor.

I do not know what the Code of Ethics says about sex between a lecturer and a student at that particular academic institution. This may be explicitly defined (in most academic institutions - it is not) as inappropriate behavior by a faculty member. In such a case, and even more so if it is true that the same lecturer is sitting on the institutional disciplinary committee, the lecturer must know that he is doing something that the institution does not allow (even if he thinks it is completely stupid) and that there are implications for the actions. But if that is not the case, and the code with me like any academic code of ethics is not clear enough on this issue, and in general, the lecturer is nothing but a victim here.

For the avoidance of doubt, the ethical code should certainly save students from interrupting their studies by unwanted courteous teaching. A lecturer or practitioner who repeatedly offers suggestions of a sexual nature (or other sexual orientation) to a student in his class is the one to show him the door. But here there is no dispute that courtship was highly desirable.

In conclusion, here is another case in which an ethics committee cuts short on the true ethical-academic aspects and behaves like a gossip tabloid. Anyone surprised?