• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Sexual Assault & Sexual Misconduct in the CF

This may be about to become the big CAF news story for the next little while.
While I still doubt the magnitude suggested in the Maclean's and L'actualité articles, but it was not inconceivable that the organization  had a problem.  I am glad that we will now have the results of somebody who has looked as source evidence as opposed to fantastically extrapolated from numbers.  The CAF may come off looking really bad (or so the speculation seems to be going), but that does not matter if the discoveries and recommendations help improve the organization for the long run.
Canadian Forces brace for report on sexual misconduct in the ranks
Review by former Supreme Court justice expected to blast military leadership

James Cudmore
CBC News
28 Apr 2015

An external investigation of sexual misconduct in the Canadian Forces will target military leadership for failing to better manage the problems of discrimination, sexual harassment and sexual assault in the ranks, CBC News has learned.

Sources familiar with the report say the language used by former Supreme Court justice Marie Deschamps in her report is "quite inflammatory."

Officers at the highest level of the Forces are bracing for the report, which was described as "pretty nasty."

"The report is pretty bad … and won't be good for the Canadian Armed Forces, especially the leadership," one source said.

The military has been preparing for the report's publication for more than a month, and CBC News has learned the government intends to make it public by the end of the week, likely as soon as Thursday, barring any change in plans.

Several senior military officials, including Gen. Tom Lawson, outgoing chief of the defence staff, will be part of a Defence Department presentation of the damning report.

Whatever Deschamps learned has apparently shaken the senior ranks of the military.

"The report is not something [the chief of defence staff] will take lightly," one source said.

Top female general to lead response

In February, Lawson established the Canadian Forces Strategic Response Team on Sexual Misconduct. It's led by Canada's highest-ranking woman, Maj.-Gen. Christine Whitecross, and supported by a top female sergeant-major, Chief Warrant Officer Helen Wheeler.

It's expected Whitecross will be there when the report is released this week and will offer her plan to solve the problems it highlights.

Lawson ordered the external review of sexual misconduct within the Canadian military more than a year ago after a spate of stories in the media suggested the military did not take seriously its responsibility to prevent and investigate misconduct against female soldiers. Some reports suggested sexual assault had reached epidemic proportions in the military.

An article published by Maclean's and L'actualité reviewed military statistics and said an average of about 178 incidents of sexual misconduct are investigated every year. The magazine suggested only about one in 10 assaults is typically reported, suggesting the number of incidents inside the military each year is likely more than 1,780, or about five per day.

The fallout from that report led the Commons defence committee last May to question the military's top general. Lawson conceded he needed more information about the scope of the problem.

"I need to know if barriers exist in reporting incidents of sexual misconduct or sexual harassment and need to be certain that the chain of command is reacting to complaints appropriately," he told MPs.

Review looked at rules, procedures

Lawson said the external review he ordered would look at the rules, procedures and the processes the military uses to respond to complaints of sexual misconduct so that more women will trust the military to take them seriously and treat them fairly.

"My heart goes out to them, those individuals need to be well-protected and brought back into an organization that they can trust, so we need to make sure that they can report and that we follow up with investigations and prosecutions," Lawson told reporters last May.

The former justice was appointed by Lawson to lead the external review. That work began in earnest in June last year and her investigation concluded in January.

Deschamps visited with hundreds of soldiers at bases across the country. In some cases, she held separate sessions for soldiers based on rank and gender.

Deschamps has refused several requests to be interviewed, but said by email she was convinced the military would be forthcoming about her report.

"I am convinced the Armed Forces will do their best to ensure that both the report and their position are well understood," she said.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadian-forces-brace-for-report-on-sexual-misconduct-in-the-ranks-1.3052154
 
So the token power point, a couple hail Mary's and the leadership is washed clean.  ::)
 
Not sure what you mean?

As an organization, we have the same issues any work place in Canada has including this type.  No one should be surprised there.

However, we already have a whole sack full of overlapping policies and regulations to deal with offenders, inckuding the CSD and the CCC.

I don't know, but it seems to me that there are things already in place, and the issue is more victims not willing to report and current policies not being enforced if something is reported.

As always, we are an easy target.  Thanks again to CBC for the suggestive wording in your article.  ::)

 
Eye In The Sky said:
Not sure what you mean?

As an organization, we have the same issues any work place in Canada has including this type.  No one should be surprised there.

However, we already have a whole sack full of overlapping policies and regulations to deal with offenders, inckuding the CSD and the CCC.

I don't know, but it seems to me that there are things already in place, and the issue is more victims not willing to report and current policies not being enforced if something is reported.

As always, we are an easy target.  Thanks again to CBC for the suggestive wording in your article.  ::)

So because we have all of those things in place we shouldn't take more action and just dismiss this as CBC having a beef against the CAF?

it could be that that sac of policies and regs isn't enough and maybe we could strive for something better?

And I love how in some cases we are just like any other organisation in Canada and in other cases we are not like any other organisation in Canada.  We can't have it both ways.

We are NOT like any other organisation in Canada.  There is a workplace dynamic that is unique and a power relationship between leaders and subordinates that doesn't exist anywhere else therefore will be subject to more scrutiny.

It may seem to you that everything is in place and that victims are not willing to report (obviously it is their fault  ::) ), but I certainly don't have a crystal ball in that regard.  maybe rather than state that everything is fine move along, you could ask yourself WHY those victims don't come forward and address that because the current sac of policies and regs don't seem to be taking that into account.
 
I don't think the leadership/subordinate relationship in the CAF is unique. Every workplace where people's careers progress by working hard, and being noticed has the same dynamic. In fact, I think that because we have the policies we do, and the processes in place required to release personnel, we are a much better workplace. The young interns, secretaries, jr partners, underlings, etc. in many other corporate/political entities don't have the same protection. In a lot of those cases, they are just fired or let go when they rebuff unwanted advances or file complaints.

What does make us different is that we in many ways we force individuals to become a family. We make people eat together, sleep in close quarters, spend almost every minute of their time together. That I believe makes the incidents that more traumatic for victims, when one of the family turns on them.
 
I think you got the wrong tone from my post.

- we are like any workplace in that we recruit from the Canadian population.  Therefore we encounter similar workplace issues WRT sexual harassment and assault.  The same is true for DUIs, etc.

- I never said anything about the victims being at fault.  Nor would I ever say that.  Ever.

- I never said the staus quo can't be improved.  I merely stated we already have multiple tools in the toolbelt to deal with situations in the CAF.  I can't comment on if they are being used appropriately.  The report should detail its finding regarding that.

- if current policies aren't being applied consistently,  then perhaps the root issue isn't policy itself but its application.

But, thanks for twisting my words around.    ;)
 
I attended a gathering about this report that's coming out. What I took away from the brief was this:

1) The report was commissioned in response to the hyperbolic allegations in the McLean's article.

2) The main "damning" statement is that we have an underlying "sexual culture". what that means and how it compares to "culture" I'm not sure. Apparently the focus of the report was not that sexual harassment was rampant as implied by the article, but instead that there is an underlying sexual culture.

3) Apparently Ms Deschamps was horrified that there is frequent use of four letter words, most notably one that starts with c and one that starts with f.

4) There is much handwringing that she is upset about finding dust where she was sent to find boulders.

Now I haven't read the report yet, I do not know what is in it. I don't know how accurate my impressions are. That said at this time I feel the only reason this is being pushed as a big deal, instead of vindication of our members, is because the hand wringing has the MSM smelling blood in the water.

:Edit for spelling
 
Seems to me that MacLeans has brought up the subject of Sexual Assault in the CAF several times in the past decade or so, with at least two covers of their magazine depicting female CAF members and raising the topic of sexual assaults or discrimination.  It makes me wonder, although these are serious allegations, just who at MacLeans is behind these articles.

As Cantor and Capt Loadie post, the CAF does take this seriously, including the fact that there have been FALSE allegations made, and have steps in place to deal with these claims.  That CAF members come from all walks of Canadian society, what problems that exist in other aspects of Canadian society will at times appear in the CAF.  The CAF, due to the nature of its role, has to maintain more stringent rules and regulations on its personnel to ensure criminal activities are exposed and dealt with in accordance with the Law under the Criminal Code of Canada and Military Law. 

Previous MacLeans articles on the Canadian military in 1998: 


May 28, 1998: Rape in the military;

June 1, 1998:  Speaking out on sexual assault in the military;

Dec 14, 1998: Of rape and justice.
 
c_canuk said:
I attended a gathering about this report that's coming out. What I took away from the brief was this:

. . . . .

Now I haven't read the report yet, I do not know what is in it. I don't know how accurate my impressions are. That said at this time I feel the only reason this is being pushed as a big deal, instead of vindication of our members, is because the hand wringing has the MSM smelling blood in the water.

:Edit for spelling

I'm a little confused.  This "gathering" at which you received the "brief", was it organized by your chain of command?  You know, like an O Grp.  Since the report has not yet been released, has the standard for passage of information been lowered to rumour, innuendo and speculation?  I know things likely have changed a lot since I retired, maybe it is much more efficient to deal with this type of info in the morning meeting rather than later in the mess where we used to gossip.  I know, shouldn't be gossiping in the mess, but that's preferable to planning the next sexual conquest.

I will admit to being deliberately condescending and I should apologize.  However, on a serious note, I am genuinely interested in knowing if this was an official gathering at which only speculation was made as to the contents of the report and the discussion seemed to be pointed at painting it as one-sided and no big deal.  If so, I'm a little surprised at the actions of your leadership.

 
Blackadder1916 said:
I'm a little confused.  This "gathering" at which you received the "brief", was it organized by your chain of command?  You know, like an O Grp.  Since the report has not yet been released, has the standard for passage of information been lowered to rumour, innuendo and speculation?  I know things likely have changed a lot since I retired, maybe it is much more efficient to deal with this type of info in the morning meeting rather than later in the mess where we used to gossip.  I know, shouldn't be gossiping in the mess, but that's preferable to planning the next sexual conquest.

I will admit to being deliberately condescending and I should apologize.  However, on a serious note, I am genuinely interested in knowing if this was an official gathering at which only speculation was made as to the contents of the report and the discussion seemed to be pointed at painting it as one-sided and no big deal.  If so, I'm a little surprised at the actions of your leadership.

1) I said those were my impressions based on the information I was given and my deductions. Based on the facts of why the report was commisioned and the jist of what the report contains.

2) CWO West and CWO Marchand were the speakers at the gathering, and they seemed very concerned with the report, and at no time did they paint it as no big deal. They seem genuinely concerned about the contents of the report and the impact it will have on the CF and the Public.
 
I feel your post deserves a more detailed reply...

Blackadder1916 said:
I'm a little confused.  This "gathering" at which you received the "brief", was it organized by your chain of command?

Yes it was an organized event.

You know, like an O Grp.  Since the report has not yet been released, has the standard for passage of information been lowered to rumour, innuendo and speculation? 

The gathering was in the form of a town hall.


I know things likely have changed a lot since I retired, maybe it is much more efficient to deal with this type of info in the morning meeting rather than later in the mess where we used to gossip.  I know, shouldn't be gossiping in the mess, but that's preferable to planning the next sexual conquest.

I don't think that CWO West and CWO Marchand would appreciate your implications that they are spreading gossip or any others you might be making.

I will admit to being deliberately condescending and I should apologize.  However, on a serious note, I am genuinely interested in knowing if this was an official gathering

It was official.

at which only speculation was made as to the contents of the report

I believe the speakers were not speculating, I believe they have read it and that is why they were having a town hall.

and the discussion seemed to be pointed at painting it as one-sided and no big deal.  If so, I'm a little surprised at the actions of your leadership.

At no point was the discussion painting the report as no big deal, it was presented to us as something that should greatly concern us, then gave us some highlights of the report. The rest is my deductions based on what I was given. Make no mistake, the report is being taken quite seriously.

I never said that the report was being taken as no big deal. What I wrote was what I gathered from the presentation:

1) The report was commissioned in response to the hyperbolic allegations in the McLean's article.

2) The main "damning" statement is that we have an underlying "sexual culture". what that means and how it compares to "culture" I'm not sure. Apparently the focus of the report was not that sexual harassment was rampant as implied by the article, but instead that there is an underlying sexual culture.

3) Apparently Ms Deschamps was horrified that there is frequent use of four letter words, most notably one that starts with c and one that starts with f.

4) There is much handwringing that she is upset...

The rest was just my opinion on the matter

... about finding dust where she was sent to find boulders.

Now I haven't read the report yet, I do not know what is in it. I don't know how accurate my impressions are. That said at this time I feel the only reason this is being pushed as a big deal, instead of vindication of our members, is because the hand wringing has the MSM smelling blood in the water.

I hope I've been clear enough, and answered your questions. If I have not, please let me know and I will attempt to clarify further.
 
Link to the Report.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/caf-community-support-services/external-review-sexual-mh-2015/summary.page

You can get a link to the rest of the report, or a pdf of the entire thing, as well as the action plan and other documentation there.

As for the content of the report, some of it had me rolling my eyes and it pretty much confirms that the McLean's article was inaccurate.

That said it does highlight some serious issues and provides a framework to address them that should most definitely be taken seriously.


Some of the issues, like:

Lack of central repository/authority for information and reporting
Lack of plain language in written documentation/existing information
Lack of equal access to resources due to geographical reasons

seem to be endemic of the organization as a whole, and not just in regards to this one aspect.

Hopefully in solving those issues the action plan can also provide direction for positive change throughout the organization, where these problems also exist.

Other issues brought up in the report, I hope can be solved with the independent reporting system mentioned in the recommendations that the CDS has accepted.
 
And here's the CDS's response/"action plan":
The Chief of Defence Staff, General Tom Lawson, today released an action plan to address inappropriate sexual behaviour in the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) following several recent incidents. He also publicly released the independent external review authority’s report into sexual misconduct and sexual harassment.

He was accompanied at a news conference today by Canadian Forces Chief Warrant Officer Kevin West, Madame Marie Deschamps, former Supreme Court of Canada Justice and the External Review Authority, and Major-General Chris Whitecross, who is leading the CAF Strategic Response Team on Sexual Misconduct.

Quick Facts

    In April 2014, the CDS ordered an independent external review to look into sexual misconduct and sexual harassment cases involving CAF members following a number of media reports on the subject and a subsequent Internal Review. Madame Marie Deschamps, a former Supreme Court of Canada Justice, began this review in June 2014 and completed it in March 2015.

    The CDS directed the creation of the Canadian Armed Forces Strategic Response Team on Sexual Misconduct in February 2015. The initial mandate of the Strategic Response Team was to conduct a detailed review of the final report produced by the External Review Authority, and develop an action plan to address the report’s recommendations.

    The strategy released today allows the CAF to deliver a decisive response, while allowing the organization to further understand and solve the more complex aspects of the problem and develop more comprehensive solutions.

    Highlights of the action plan include:

        Engaging leadership at all levels to support and engage in the changes required;

        Examining what structure is required to centralize the responsibility for prevention, training, victim support, research, and reporting of inappropriate sexual behaviour;

        Assessing existing inappropriate sexual behaviour reporting processes with the aim of encouraging increased reporting by making the process easier to navigate for victims;

        A comprehensive review of all language and definitions associated with inappropriate sexual behaviour;

        Conducting a comprehensive review of all relevant policies associated with inappropriate sexual behaviour, with the objective of integrating them more coherently;

        Developing options to better inform victims of the complaint processes that are currently in place;

        Examining the delivery of support to members who come forward with allegations; and

        Updating the education and training curriculum both in terms of content and delivery.

    Support and referrals for any member dealing with sexual misconduct or sexual assault are provided as required from the Military Police’s Victims Assistance Program, the Canadian Forces Health Services, Canadian Forces Member Assistance Program, military chaplains, military family resource centres, and civilian social services.
 
The Commandant of CFNES spoke to all instructors during the lunch hour today.  I am told, by one of them, that it was to speak on this reports imminent release and a reminder to all that as CAF members they were to refrain from commenting on the report's contents on social media.  I don't know how long that is in force for as I am presently a student and wasn't present at the briefing.
 
Christie Blatchford has a nice counterpoint to the report and the language it used.
You can find it in the Ottawa Citizen.
 
PanaEng said:
Christie Blatchford has a nice counterpoint to the report and the language it used.
You can find it in the Ottawa Citizen.

Her National post article, with a short video of her opinions (unfortunately cut off too early) at this link:

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/christie-blatchford-troubling-report-on-sexualized-culture-in-canadas-military-may-overstate-problem
 
Here are Christie Blatchford's words:

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

Christie Blatchford: Troubling report on ‘sexualized culture’ in Canada’s military may overstate problem
The National Post
Christie Blatchford | April 30, 2015 3:32 PM ET

At first blush it’s a withering report — there’s a “sexualized culture” within the Canadian Forces that is so pervasive it’s “conducive to more serious incidents of sexual harassment and assault” and so hostile to women that victims rarely bother to report or complain.

That’s the picture in an 87-page report written by former Supreme Court of Canada judge Marie Deschamps, who was asked last summer by retiring Chief of the Defence Staff Tom Lawson to examine the scope of the problem.

The report, called External Review into Sexual Misconduct and Sexual Harassment in the Canadian Armed Forces, was released in Ottawa Thursday.

Lawson’s request came in the wake of sensational allegations in Maclean’s magazine and its Quebec sister publication, L’actualite, documenting specific incidents of assault and the military’s failure to do anything much about them.

In fact, Deschamps’ report mirrors the magazines’ findings and tone, though it lacks the real names and details that gave the news stories such punch. Confidentiality and anonymity are the imprimatur of this report.

The former judge’s language is inflammatory: Unnamed cadets at the two Canadian military colleges described sexual harassment as a “passage oblige,” almost a mandatory experience, and said sexual assault was “an ever-present risk”; within the lower ranks, unnamed women said they are routinely exposed to “swear words and highly degrading expressions”; experiences with sexual harassment and assault “begin as early as basic training”; unnamed leaders such as senior non-commissioned officers, or NCOs, turn a blind eye to misconduct; some of those charged with investigating it, unnamed military police, don’t even know what constitutes consent to sex and infecting it all, a climate where such behaviour is tolerated, or ignored or sanctioned with a wink-wink, nudge-nudge.

And though Deschamps grudgingly acknowledges that unnamed higher-ranked women “seemingly do not suffer as much from the sexualized environment” and that some particularly “resolute” victims had been able to confront the perpetrators, she dismisses them as the exception.


She actually concludes, of such non-complainers, “this is largely because members appear to internalize the prevailing sexualized culture as they move up through the organization.”

Deschamps makes 10 recommendations, probably the most critical the establishment of an outside-the-chain-of-command agency, with the temporary acronym of CASAH (Centre for Accountability for Sexual Assault and Harassment), which would be responsible for receiving all reports of inappropriate sexual conduct, training, victim support and research.

That only makes sense in the small, intimate world of the CF, particularly on bases or when troops are deployed.

That soldiers sometimes not only work together but also often live side-by-side makes it more important that victims have a safe place, outside of the hierarchy, to report.

But another recommendation would see soldiers allowed to report harassment or assault to the CASAH “without the obligation to trigger a formal complaint process” – a probable recipe for the very sort of mess that saw two Liberal Members of Parliament recently suspended, their names and careers in tatters, after two NDP MPs made serious informal allegations against them, but declined to file complaints.

The former judge, who retired from the high court in 2012, held town hall meetings at military bases across Canada, did telephone interviews, accepted written statements and organized focus groups, and in total heard from 700 individuals.

That’s a significant number from across the ranks and I accept that the military, like most civilian institutions from the House of Commons on down, likely has its share of the handsy, sexist and worse, and that the women who came forward to Maclean’s and L’actualite suffered.

But that’s a fraction of the 100,000 regular, reserve and civilian members of the CF, and in Deschamps’ florid broad brush strokes, I didn’t even recognize the organization I think I know pretty well.

I’ve spent an extended amount of time with Canadian soldiers in three very different ways.

Once, I was the lone woman and lone reporter on a Royal Canadian Regiment re-enactment of the regiment’s trip to the Yukon in the late 1800s (we travelled by river raft to Dawson City). In the first summer of the war in the former Yugoslavia, when Canadian troops, the Van Doos, were tasked with opening up the Sarajevo airport for humanitarian aid. I was there for several weeks. And finally, in 2006-07, I made four trips, mostly with the Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry but also with the other two regular infantry regiments and countless reservists, as an embedded journalist with troops in Kandahar.

I certainly heard plenty of profanity and raw language (engaged in it too, often the worst offender) but in none of those places was there a simmering highly sexualized culture, let alone one that was dangerous to women. The tensions were those that I consider normal in fraught environments, or in places where men outnumber women (such as the sports world, where once I worked).

Now, that I was never once alarmed or offended may mean only that I am beyond offence, or as Deschamps would say, that I have internalized it all or am particularly resolute – in other words, a freak who wouldn’t recognize a highly sexualized culture if it bit me in the arse.

But the military she describes is so completely contrary to my own experience that I feel compelled to say so.

I found NCOs to be generally good leaders, some superb. Most officers I got to know — a handful of majors and one particularly stellar lieutenant-colonel — are ridiculously well-educated, sophisticated and modern thinkers. At the Royal Military College in Kingston, where I’ve been a couple of times, I found the smartest and most engaged students, women and men, in the country; I really struggle to accept that they all would just blithely tolerate sexual harassment as a right of passage. I’ve also adopted a reserve regiment, and have spent a fair bit of time in their collective company, even at the sort of booze-fuelled events Deschamps so dislikes.

The report is likely to cause what is now the usual shock/horror/outrage, as did the CBC’s internal report into its own handling of the Jian Ghomeshi scandal, as did the unfolding of the anonymous allegations against the two Liberal MPs. The judge refers to both those stories in her introduction.

It’s in the third sentence of that intro that she writes, “The problem of sexual misconduct in society at large cannot be overstated.”

Actually, it’s often overstated, and that’s just what she’s done here, again.


National Post
cblatchford@postmedia.com

LINK



 
I haven't read the report and offer these comments, not as a reply to the report but a comment on MY experience in just shy of 26 years in the CAF.

- I have served in the Reserves, and the Regular Force. 
- I have been posted to army, navy and air force units. 
- I have worked in field units, line squadrons, Training Establishments, and Headquarters in those years.
- I have served in Canada, the US, the UK, Mediterranean,  and the Middle East. 

In all of that time, those units, those locations, I have knowledge of only 2 incidents that were sexual harassment in nature.  In one case, a female recruit was harassing, sexually harassing and had assaulted a male soldier who wasn't interested in a relationship with her.  Once this was discovered, the CofC reacted quickly and SIU was brought in.  That was 1998.  In the other case, a course instructor had made inappropriate comments during an inspection of the female candidates room on  CLC, and looked at things not appropriate for him to look at during the inspection.  The females reported it to the course CofC immediately.  The instructor was removed immediately,  disciplinary and admin action was taken and the Crse WO and Crse O were also held aaccountable.  This was back in 1993.

22 years ago, those female Cpls knew what happened was wrong and did something about it.

Am I saying there is no issue today?  No. 

Am I saying the report appears to be inflated based on the article above?  My 2.5 decades of experience in both Res and Reg forces, in all three environments from TEs to line units and HQs doesn't agree with this assessment and the word 'endemic'. 

I take exception to our entire professional institution being painted with such a wide, all encompassing brush and say thank you to Mrs Blatchford for her article.
 
Back
Top