Midshipmen should never have been removed from commercial ships and MARAD owes the maritime industry an apology.
This weekend, I finally had an opportunity to do an in-depth analysis of the two SA/SH studies regarding the Academy. I am reporting what I consider to be the critical results here. I have now added a post describing how I culled this information from the 2011-12 and 2013-14 SA/SH studies. I have also posted a separate editorial about the statistics.
There are two key take-aways from the statistics:
1. The data from the two surveys shows a significant reduction in “sea year” sexual assault from 2011-12 to 2013-14. This is directly contrary to what MARAD is telling the world:
2. Both surveys show that the vast majority of all sexual assaults on female midshipmen are committed by fellow midshipmen:
The above stunning statistic is absolutely unacceptable. But, it is a midshipman problem (which makes it a problem that must be addressed at the Academy through good leadership); it is not a sea year problem (which means that it is not an industry problem). Midshipmen are apparently taking a culture that exists at the Academy to sea with them.
Given that the surveys identify midshipmen as the principal source of the problem, cancelling sea year (and now assigning midshipmen to non-commercial vessels) does not address the problem. Midshipmen are still paired or grouped with other midshipmen when assigned to state school training ships, Military Sealift Command ships, or U.S. Navy ships. The problem has just been shifted to different platforms. MARAD is not protecting midshipmen from the problem.
MARAD owes the entire industry a huge apology.