Do professors have a constitutional right to date students? Professor Paul Abramson thinks so. Abramson is a 57 year old psychologist at the University of California at Los Angeles. His university, like many others, bans romance between professors and students. Abrahamson is about to publish a book Romance in the Ivory Tower that faults such policies as moralistic and outdated.
"For me this is not an issue of who's sleeping with whom," Abramson said in an interview in the current issue of the Chronicle of Higher Education. "It's an issue about where the power to make the choice resides." According to Abramson, the Ninth Amendment to the U.S. constitution protects what he calls "the right to romance." Intrigued, I picked up my copy of the U.S. Constitution and perused it. No such right. I tried reading the document standing on my head. Still nothing. I squeezed lemon juice and held the paper up to the light. Gee, the right to romance didn't appear anywhere.
Abramson points out that the Ninth Amendment reserves all rights not earlier specified in the document to the people. So do I have a Ninth Amendment right to take drugs? To travel without a passport? To conduct my own foreign policy? How is the right to romance different from these? Abramson goes into high lyrical gear. "We make choices over things that are exceedingly intimate: who to love, what to believe in, the character of our writing and speech. These are part of the fundamental nature of who we are." Abramson aruges that sexuality, like speech and religion, is constitutive of our identity. Yes, but speech and religion are specifically protected in the First Amendment. If the founders agreed with Abramson, why didn't they remember to add, "Congress shall make no law restricting the right to romance?"
The answer, I suppose, is because the founders hadn't listened to too many Peter, Paul and Mary songs. The founders seem to have recognized that sexuality is fraught with the potential both for personal exploitation and social disorder. I don't have any problem with a professor dating a graduate student. But when a professor romances a student in his or her own class, the situation changes. Moreover, how would you as a parent feel if your eighteen-year-old freshman daughter began a sexual relationship with a 57 year old psychology professor? My point is that these situations can become extremely complicated, with lots of competing considerations at stake, and that's why they cannot be settled through the absolutism of "rights."
If professors had a constitutional "right to romance," then a student's refusal to sleep with them would constitute a violation of their rights. The whole concept is a legal absurdity. Professor Abramson is certainly entitled to cruise the bars of Los Angeles looking for love if he wants to. I just think should leave his copy of the Constitution behind.
Reader Comments ( Page 4 of 5)
46. David S. here you go...http;//www.reformedonline.com/view/reformedonline/famdate.htm
Bridget at 10:21AM on Aug 23rd 2007
47. What the professor fails to realize is that the assertion of a supposed "right" does not mean it truly exists. Furthermore, the existence of a "right," does not preclude one from suffering consequences of one's actions. One can choose to date one's student, and then suffer the consequence of losing one's position as a teacher.
The professor does not have any "right" to be a teacher regardless of his actions. If a professor has sexual relations with one of his or her students, as a general rule he or she should be dismissed from the position of instructor. Similarly a manager having sexual relations with a subordinate should normally forfeit his or her post.
Marty Lund at 2:29PM on Aug 23rd 2007
48. Do you have a right to ingest drugs? Yup, you surely do--and any federal attempt to deny that right falls foul of the 9th Amendment. That's why an amendment to prohibit alcohol was necessary; that's why drug legislation didn't initially outlaw drugs, but rather taxed them.
Do you have a right to conduct your own foreign policy? No, because the Constitution gives that power to the federal government.
Do you have a right to travel without a passport? Well, that's debatable, but Congress has the power to 'regulate commerce with foreign nations,' which would seem to include travel.
Now, as to whether or not it's constitutional to prevent professors from dating students, or students from dating professors, is another matter entirely. But sheesh, Dinesh--you're smarter than to be wrong on those three questions earlier!
Bob Uhl at 3:23PM on Aug 23rd 2007
49. I always love it when the liberal left inserts "rights" into the Constitution to justify any and every abomination. There is no "Right To Choose" in the Constitution ... Nor right to date, nor right to choose whom you date for that matter. But the Constitution really isn't involved here because we're not talking about State action ... remember, "Constitutional Rights" really only apply to STATE actions. The State of California has not made it ILLEGAL for a Professor to date a student ... in this case, they're only acting as an employer.
The simple answer to this whole issue is that it is NOT a "Constitutional Question". The reason the Professor can't date his students is a matter of CONTRACT law. His contract contains a clause that gives the instution the right to set policy which he must follow. One such policy is "Don't date your students". He refuses to follow it, he is in breach of his contract and the institution has the right to fire him for misconduct ... period.
Richard at 6:19PM on Aug 23rd 2007
50. Once someone is 18, age differences no longer matter. If two consenting adults agree to a relationship, it is no one's business of one is 18 and the other 80. It may be odd, but it's still no one's business. As to rhondalee, if a parent assualted me for a consensual relationship with her over 18 daughter, I'd press charges.
Corzich at 10:33PM on Aug 23rd 2007
51. Professors dating students sounds really weird, The professor at this college in California is wrong, so wrong although it is true, that in the constitution all citizens have equal rights, and the right to defend her/him self no where in the constitution of the USA does, it say, "Professors have a right to date a college student of their choosing who attends the same college." I will give you an example, say a professor wanted to date some one who didn't attend the college he attended he could date that person, the reason professors and students don't date each other, not now not ever is because, at the age that a teenager is going into college, they are still sorting out their feelings, for college men in their age group, and I strongly feel that dating a professor whether it be the student's choosing or the professor's has a lot to do with age, some people say, Age ain't nothing but a number." But, a person's age can be turned into as well as their thinking at the time of an event occurring can turn into a law suit or jail time, i think the professor the above article, because he wants to date a college student himself, because he wants to feel young and useful. But another issue arises with this and that is an emotional or psychological, or mental attachment an individual, child, or adult can have on a person or group of people. I feel this is the real issue, and should be addressed along with professors dating students or students dating professors.
smartiepantssteffi at 2:28PM on Aug 24th 2007
52. Corzich, apparently you've never benefited from a higher education, perhaps, alas, a GED? You cannot even spell a name properly 3 seconds after, supposedly, reading it. Rhoda nor RhoNda. Did there happen to be an invisible N in my name that caught me unawares?
I also said, my daughter was 17, not 18. Please be as litigious as every other imbecile in this country. Be my guest. You are most likely a 50ish, fat bellied, balding man that a child at the age of 18 would not give a second, let's make it fifth look at. I suppose if you paid for it you'd have a go.
Predators of your ilk make it easy on Mom's that have the soul of a lioness when protecting our chidren, press charges, putz, if you molested my 17 year old daughter it would be HER that would thake your baggy butt down, trained in Kung Fu, 5'9" of pure Cubana strength, of character, wit as well as physical prowess. Who is going to press charges against whom, cochon?
Hmmmmmmmmmm, 17 year old female or old nasty man without proof of any such occurance.
Get a real friggin' life, you dimwit...........
rhodalee at 1:20AM on Aug 26th 2007
53. I would not want to take Professor Paul Abramsons class. It is obvious that teaching is not his priority. He is an embarassment to his entire educational institution.
star d. at 2:35AM on Aug 26th 2007
54. There are so many uninformed and out of this world comments on his column that
one could write a book in response;
however such cannot be in the cards right now. However, I just started a blog that focuses on this issue-
http://dankprofessor.wordpress.com
Feel free to drop by. A few brief comments-
A number of commentators were distressed by age differentiated relationships,the 57 year old prof dating the 22 or younger female student. Such is the stereotype which these policies to ban student prof relationships flourish. If one is so offended , might I suggest that they work to legislate age differential bans? The law regulates minimum age of consent so it is not such a radical legal departure. However, such would probably call for a constitutional amendment. So be it if this is an issue worth fighting for. I do not mean to be humorous about the age thing; I think that the age dynamic is often what fuels the opposition to such relationships. I know; I can speak from experience. As a univ prof I dated a number of students and ex-students; generally but not always
younger. In any case in 1998 when I was 56 I dated a student who was 2 years older than myself. I first dated her after my fall class was over and our relationship continued so she enrolled in my next Fall class and our
dating continued. We were discreet, but not in the closet; all of my puritan feminist colleagues gave me absolutely no negative feedback; in fact, a number
were quite supportive. Age was the major variable. Many of the campus
feminist meddlers just couldn't bring themselves to try to protect a mature 58 year old woman who did not want their protection. Info as to how I dealt with the grading issue, go to my dankprofessor blog. In any case, our
dating led to marriage; universities don't and can't prevent sudents and professors from marrying and then to both of us retiring and living an idyllic life in southern Arizona. Thank
God I didn't let the university radicals
who were mainly on the left and the
amoral bureaucrats determine my choice of mates. And I refuse to follow the
advice-wait till you are married or wait till she graduates. And as for outraged parents, I always had good relationships with paretns of students I dated; some excellent relationships.
There may be some parents out there who would have hated the idea, but none that I met; maybe such was the case since the women I dated were not prone to make categorical judgments, they looked at the individual; maybe their
parents did the same, and didn't see red when their daughter brought home a
prof who was 20 years older or the same age or younger than their daughter.
In fact, I dated students were were daughters of professors.
All for now.
the dankprofessor
barry dank at 2:39PM on Aug 26th 2007
55. Dear Barry Dank:
You miss the point completely. It is not merely the age difference as it is a difference in power. A young college girl is going into the 'real world' for the first time and the potential for manipulation is too great. Anyone who has ever been a boss knows this is true. I have never gotten involved with anyone from my work because the potential for workplace romance-related disaster is just too great. Clergy, bosses, teachers have as much sway over a young woman as a rock star! It just isn't right.
Keith J. Mohrhoff at 8:04AM on Aug 27th 2007
56. The issue is not whether dating between professors and students is constitutionally protected. It is irrelevant as a constitutional question. Every organization has the right to make rules that are in the interest of that organization. Professional sports have a ban on gambling, a perfectly legal activity. A University makes many rules governing the behavior of students, professors and staff that they feel protect the University from the threat of suit as well as contributing to the furtherance of their established goals of education. If a University wished, it could simply change the rules, send out a press release alerting the families and the general public that they now have to add professors to the other danagers their sons and daughters will have to face. Getting a passing grade means never saying no to the prof.
Joe Edgington at 1:39PM on Aug 27th 2007
57. Va Va Va VOOM Vlad der MENSCH!
Mo at 7:17PM on Aug 27th 2007
58. In reply to Keith J. Mohrhoff's
comment, for my reply click
http://dankprofessor.wordpress.com/2007/
08/30/coercing-women-in-the-name-of-protection
barry dank at 4:46PM on Aug 30th 2007
59. Dingleberry D'Souza, that's exactly what the 9th Amendment was for - to specify that any other rights not covered were also the heritage of free Americans. The professor is exactly right. And yes he should have the right to take drugs and conduct his own foreign policy if he wants to because those are things a truly free person should be able to do.
Unfortunately we have lost sight of freedom and have accepted numerous limitations on our freedoms despite the efforts of the Founders to make that not happen. D'Souza is just the latest goose-stepper to authority.
R. Kohl at 4:15AM on Sep 23rd 2007
60. I absolutely agree with the professor, for a number of reasons.
First of all, there is NO PROOF that the professor is exchanging grades for sex. Zero proof, therefore a dismissal would be a case of guilty until proven innocent.
Second of all, it is ridiculous to mention some sort of "power" difference between a professor and a student for a number of reasons, including, but not limited to:
A: All policemen have power over citizens- power that can be used at gunpoint! Surely that beats the power laid over by politicians, therapists, and CERTAINLY professors (especially since professors at universities who teach ADULTS do NOT have the same sort of moral or authoratative power). Is it illegal for police officers and military personnel to date civilians? NO.
B. The claim that a student (of ANY age) does not have the ability or the resolve to resist the advances of a professor is bullshit. You have the right to say no, if a student, and if you are a professor you probably know that many of the STUDENTS are the ones doing the advancing!
The claim that a student somehow "can't resist" a professor's offer of a relationship is absolute garbage. A student who finds he/she "can't" say no to a professor is the one with the psychological problem, although a professor who holds a "no" answer against the student for no good reason SHOULD be fired, like any other sexual harrasser would.
A professor and a student who want a relationship with each other, futhermore, should not be automatically suspect. There is no proof anyone else has that these two people wouldn't have hooked up otherwise, and, like stated before, to dismiss or punish a professor because of his or her relationship with a student would constitute blatant guilt-before-innocence.
I think that any two consenting people who love each other should be "allowed" (or, rather, "not stopped") from pursuing a relationship. THe worst psychological and emotional problems always, always, always come from people not being able to pursue their love for another (be that a sexual, romantic, or any kind of love).
I find it appalling that Western culture tries to consistantly regulate and control human beings' passions and feeelings, and then innocently whip its head around and ask where all the psychological problems are coming from.
Furthermore, this obsession with power and authority has gotten me physically ill. Maybe its the emphasis on authority and ranking in our society that is confusing and intimidating these poor students and professors such (at least the ones who aren't genuinely in love).
I can tell you from personal experience (people Ive known) that while many times it's a professor's "power" or Daddy/Mommy-ish figure that turns some students on, for the majority of students, the crushes come from other things, such as mutual interest in the subject matter, rejoice feelings at finding another human being at the college who isn't immature (that's why mature-sounding women tend to fall for professors as well!), and simply because the professor and the student may have gone together ell had they never been in the same class otgehter.
All in all, I think the biggest problem here is people who are geniuinelty in love, or who at least want to honestly try out a relationship with someone whom they may one day thank God they came together with, are not allowerd to pursure their relationship. A genuine shame.
Anyone suscribing to these Puritanical "Power" beliefs I have seen on here should be instituted into an asylum immmediately. Literally.
me at 11:16PM on Oct 22nd 2008