1.0   RATIONALE 

Codes of ethics for most professional associations forbid professional-client sexual relationships; the relationships of instructor to student and supervisor to employee should also uphold this concept. Professionalism is fostered by an atmosphere of respect and trust and is undermined when those in positions of authority abuse, or appear to abuse, their power. 

1.1  Ethical Considerations 
 

(a)  The respect and trust accorded an instructor/supervisor by a student/employee, as well as the power exercised by the instructor/supervisor in giving praise or blame, conducting evaluations, or making recommendations for further study or future employment greatly diminish the student's or employee's actual freedom of choice concerning an amorous or sexual relationship. Voluntary consent by the student/employee in such a relationship is suspect, given the fundamentally asymmetric nature of the relationship. 
(b)  A romantic or sexual relationship between instructor/supervisor and student/employee may also have an adverse effect on other students and employees because it places the instructor/supervisor in a position to favor or advance one individual's interest at the expense of others and implicitly makes obtaining benefits contingent on amorous or sexual favors. 
(c) An intimate relationship with an individual, combined with a responsibility for evaluation of such individual, creates a conflict of interest. In such situations, an instructor/supervisor in the relationship must be careful to distance himself or herself from any decisions that may reward or penalize the student or employee involved. Failure to do so will be deemed to be a violation of the instructor's/supervisor's member's ethical obligation to the individual involved, to other students/employees, to colleagues, and to the university. 
1.2.  Implications for the Individual 
 
All instructors, supervisors, and other employees should, therefore, understand that there are substantial risks in even an apparently consenting relationship where a power differential exists. Even when both parties have initially consented to an amorous, romantic, or sexual relationship, charges of sexual harassment may subsequently develop. In each instance, it is the instructor, supervisor, or other employee who, by virtue of his or her special power and responsibility, bears a greater burden of accountability. 

In addition, supervisors should be aware that s. UWS 8.03(3) and s. ER-Pers 24.04(f), Wisconsin Administrative Code, prohibit giving preferential treatment in employment situations to "immediate family" members. "Immediate family" is defined to include relationships of the kind described in this consensual relationships statement.

Consenting romantic and sexual relationships addressed by this statement are those between instructor (meaning all who teach at the university--faculty members, academic staff, graduate students with teaching or tutorial responsibilities, and other instructional personnel)--and student (meaning any person studying with the instructor); between supervisor (meaning any person in a position of authority over another--to hire and fire, to grant raises and oversee task performance) and employee (meaning any person working for the supervisor); and between employee and student (where there is an instructional or an employment relationship between them).

3.1  Consensual Relationships in the Instructional/Supervisory Context 
 
Such relationships have the potential for extremely serious consequences and are, therefore, especially discouraged. 
3.2  Consensual Relationships currently outside the Instructional/Supervisory Context. 
 
Such relationships may also lead to difficulties and are, therefore, also discouraged.  In particular, when the parties are in the same academic or work unit or in units that are closely related, relationships that the parties view as consensual may appear to others to be exploitive.