Sex, power and professionals: the nature, extent and administrative justice responses to sexual misconduct and abuse perpetrated by professionals

该项目旨在对联合王国专业人员犯下的性行为不端和性虐待行为进行理论化，并对用于调查和制裁此类行为的监管和行政司法机制进行批判性评估。本研究采用女性主义的权力关系观，特别关注医生，精神科医生，圣公会和天主教神职人员，警察，法官，大律师，军队和政治家。将首先利用文献审查和流程图工作，将联合王国与比较国管辖区（新西兰、澳大利亚维多利亚、加拿大安大略）进行基准比较，并开发数据收集工具。将对法庭数据进行回顾性案例分析，并对监管机构和贸易记者进行采访。结合框架分析、描述性统计和可视化软件，将探讨权力的社会关系如何运作，并与（a）个人（B）组织-专业和（c）社会-文化层面的背景和机会相交，以解释专业虐待。此外，还将参照选定的国际基准，对行政司法机制的有效性进行评价。在英国，目前关于卫生部门以外的性行为不端和性虐待的数据很少。如此规模的数据整理将是英国的第一次;在如此多样化的职业中，这是国际上的第一次。现有的国际研究是在专业内部而不是跨专业进行的;侧重于单一部门而不是多个部门;从风险管理的角度进行研究，而不是通过对权力和不平等的分析来了解。此外，利用行政司法机制应对性行为不端在很大程度上被忽视，但在#MeToo和受害者对刑事司法系统信任度低的时代至关重要。迫切需要开展工作，以了解此类机制在多大程度上行政隔离职业犯罪者并免除其责任，或能够提供有效的制裁和威慑。

This project seeks to theorise sexual misconduct and abuse perpetrated by UK professionals and to evaluate critically the regulatory and administrative justice mechanisms used to investigate and sanction such behaviour. This study adopts a feminist relational view of power to focus specifically on doctors, psychiatrists, Anglican and Catholic clergy, police, judges, barristers, military, and politicians. Literature review and process mapping work will first be used to benchmark the UK with comparator jurisdictions (New Zealand; Victoria, Australia; Ontario, Canada) and to develop data collection instruments. Retrospective case analysis of tribunal data and interviews with regulators and trade journalists will be conducted. A combination of framework analysis, descriptive statistics and visualisation software will explore how social relations of power operate and intersect with context and opportunity at the (a) individual (b) organisational-professional and (c) socio-cultural level, to account for professional abuse. Further, and with reference to the selected international benchmarks, the effectiveness of administrative justice mechanisms will be evaluated. In the UK, little current data on sexual misconduct and abuse exists outside the health sector. Collating data on this scale will be a UK first; across such diverse professions, an international first. Extant international studies are conducted within professions rather than across; focused on single sectors rather than multiple; and approached from a risk-management perspective rather than informed by analyses of power and inequality. Furthermore, using administrative justice mechanisms to respond to sexual misconduct is largely overlooked yet critical in an era of #MeToo and low victim trust in the criminal justice system. Urgent work is required to understand how far such mechanisms administratively segregate and exonerate professional perpetrators or can offer effective sanction and deterrence.