The dissertation investigated harm in the context of institutional sexual assault using trust as a lens to identify potential for harm (1) at different stages of the trust process and (2) in interpersonal versus institutional trust relationships. Findings illuminated how stages of the trust process aligned with different harms and trust relationships, adding understanding to imposed and focal vulnerability, trustworthiness, and emergent vulnerability. The scoping review identified harms for both interpersonal and institutional trust as concrete (e.g., physical, financial) where identity, context, and power mattered, and as amorphous (e.g., professional, privacy, emotional). Interpersonal trust articles identified mechanisms to understand emotional harm (moral injury and betrayal), whereas only (institutional) betrayal arose in institutional trust. Next, qualitative analyses using the victim impact statements given at the sentencing trial of Dr. Larry Nassar compared how victims who experienced different trust relationships (interpersonal and multilevel) spoke to vulnerability, trustworthiness, and harm. Vulnerability related to identity and context, differing by type of trust. Both groups described multiple reasons to trust, but only the multilevel group identified (failed) institutional factors. Moral injury and betrayal helped understand harm, but the multilevel group identified harms tied to institutional responses (e.g., putting institutional interests above its members). The final chapter connected empirical results to the trust process framework. Legal and practical implications of the findings are discussed, where improved understanding of victims' experiences can better shape efforts at prevention, improve reporting, and better tailor legal remedies.
Read
