Confronting the perpetrator: Decision-making processes of a victim of sexual assault

Sexual assaults occur daily, yet not all sexual assault victims report the crime or agree to participate in the prosecution. Where no prosecution occurs, social consequences include lack of justice for the victim, freedom for the perpetrator to continue assaulting, a weakened legal system, and a more perilous society for all. The problem is that not enough is known about the decision-making processes of sexual assault victims who do take part in prosecuting the perpetrators. The purpose of this autobiographical case study was to determine what decision-making strategies a subject used in choosing to prosecute a sexual assault perpetrator and to remain engaged until the legal proceedings concluded. The key research questions focused on the decision-making processes used by the subject in choosing to prosecute the perpetrator and remain in the legal system. This autobiographical case study utilized a narrative method of data analysis in which the circumstances and factors contributing to the victim's crucial decisions were compared to the decision-making theory of Janis and Mann and the value-focused thinking theory of Keeney. Results indicated the subject made most decisions to confront the perpetrator based upon personal values, and that those values led to decisions that tended to benefit society as a whole over decisions that would primarily benefit the subject. It is important that law enforcement and the legal system create an environment that makes reporting a more likely choice for these victims. By gaining some insight into why a victim would indeed report and bear witness against the perpetrator in the first place, implications for social change are the potential for increased reporting and victim-engagement in the prosecution of cases of sexual assault given the described decision paradigm.