That was until an FBI interview of Hill was leaked to the press. Hill asserted that Thomas had sexually harassed her while he was her supervisor at the Department of Education and the EEOC.4 Heavily scrutinized for her choice to follow Thomas to a second job after he had already allegedly harassed her, Hill was in a conundrum shared by many women—putting up with abuse in exchange for a reputable position and the opportunity to fulfill a career ambition.
Hill is a trailblazer for women yearning to speak the truth, and she brought national attention to sexual harassment in the early 1990s. On December 16, 2017, the Commission on Sexual Harassment and Advancing Equality in the Workplace was formed. Hill was selected to lead the charge against sexual harassment in the entertainment industry.5
A forensic assessment of harassment
Hill’s courageous story is one of many touched upon in the 2016 book Because of Sex.6 Author Gillian Thomas, a senior staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union’s Women’s Rights Project, explores how Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 made it illegal to discriminate “because of sex.”
The field of forensic psychiatry has long been attentive to themes of sexual harassment and discrimination. The American Academy of Psychiatry and Law has a robust list of landmark cases thought to be especially important and significant for forensic psychiatry.7 This list includes cases brought forth by tenacious, yet ordinary women who used the law to advocate, and some have taken their fight all the way to the Supreme Court. Let’s consider 2 such cases:
Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v Vinson (1986).8 This was a U.S. labor law case. Michelle Vinson rose through the ranks at Meritor Savings Bank, only to be fired for excessive sick leave. She filed a Title VII suit against the bank. Vinson alleged that the bank was liable for sexual harassment perpetrated by its employee and vice president, Sidney Taylor. Vinson claimed that there had been 40 to 50 sexual encounters over 4 years, ranging from fondling to indecent exposure to rape. Vinson asserted that she never reported these events for fear of losing her job. The Supreme Court, in a 9-to-0 decision, recognized sexual harassment as a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Continue to: Harris v Forklift Systems, Inc. (1993)