Stealthing and Sexual Consent: Addressing Non-Consensual Condom Removal and Survivor Support on College Campuses

Abstract

Stealthing, the nonconsensual removal of a condom during sexual intercourse, is a prevalent yet underreported form of sexual misconduct, particularly among college students. This white paper examines the legal landscape, gaps in responses, and the burden of stealthing on college students. It presents actionable strategies for college campuses to combat stealthing, including updating policies, enforcing a zero-tolerance policy, training staff, providing survivor-centered support services, integrating cultural competency, and ensuring transparent enforcement of processes. These strategies aim to empower college campuses to prevent and reduce stealthing, promote informed consent, and enhance survivor support.

1. Introduction

Stealthing, the nonconsensual removal of a condom during intercourse [1], is a globally prevalent yet underreported form of sexual misconduct. A scoping review by Davis et al. [2] found that stealthing prevalence ranged from 7.9% to 43% among women and 5% to 19% among men. Furthermore, due to the resulting unprotected sexual intercourse, stealthing may put victims at risk of exposure to sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and unintended pregnancies [3,4,5]. For example, a qualitative study in Brazil highlighted the real-world impact, noting cases of STIs, pregnancies, and even illegal terminations [5]. Additionally, research from Australia found that over half of stealthing survivors reported emotional distress and fear of STIs [6].

2. Current Legal Landscape in Response to Stealthing

Stealthing has gained increasing legal recognition as a form of sexual violence [7]. In Switzerland [8] and Germany [9], courts found individuals guilty of stealthing, with sentences including jail time and reduced sexual violence charges. In Canada’s 2022 R. v. Kirkpatrick case [10], the court ruled that condom use is integral to sexual consent, reinforcing that “no, not without a condom” does not mean “yes, without one”. These international developments offer relevant guidance for U.S. lawmakers and educational institutions, especially given the comparative legal frameworks found in Canada, Australia, and the UK. As legal recognition of stealthing expands globally, it signals a growing consensus around its classification as a serious violation—an insight that could shape U.S. legal and institutional responses moving forward.

While the United States lacks criminal prosecution for stealthing, some legal scholars have argued for civil remedies. Civil law allows survivors to seek financial compensation for damages [11], and thus, in the case of stealthing, restorative justice can be sought for medical expenses, psychological harm, and unwanted pregnancies. California led the way in 2021 by amending its civil code to explicitly classify stealthing as a civil offense, enabling survivors to sue perpetrators [12]. Maine [13] and Washington [14] followed in 2023 and 2024, respectively, broadening the scope to include tampering with any sexual protective device.

Despite these legal advancements, there have been no known successful civil cases in the U.S. Experts suggest barriers such as evidentiary challenges, legal complexities, and difficulties proving non-consent contribute to the lack of cases [1,7]. Moreover, legal recourse alone does not prevent stealthing or adequately support survivors. To address this gap, prevention, education, and survivor-centered responses are crucial, especially among the most at-risk.

3. Burden of Stealthing Among College Students

College students are known to navigate and experiment with diverse experiences, making their college years a time of increased sexual exploration [15,16,17] and risky sexual behaviors [18,19]. Studies have also highlighted that factors such as alcohol or substance use and peer pressure are prevalent among this population, often contributing to risky sexual practices [17,19,20,21]. Additionally, sexual health education programs vary significantly across the United States and often fail to comprehensively cover the concept of consent [22], leaving many incoming college students with an insufficient understanding of consent and sexual health boundaries [23]. Moreover, gender dynamics on college campuses can create power imbalances, leading to misinterpretations of consent in sexual relationships [24,25].

While data on the prevalence of stealthing among college students and young adults remain limited, existing literature indicates that women, racial and ethnic minorities, and individuals who engage in alcohol or substance use may be disproportionately affected [26,27,28]. Further, a study among college students found that many participants recognized the behavior of condom removal as a common experience but not aware of the terminology itself [29]. Cumulatively, the combination of the above-discussed factors, such as sexual exploration, insufficient consent education, substance use, power dynamics, lack of awareness, and legal precedence can increase the likelihood of stealthing occurring among college students.

Given such risk, college campuses can serve as critical spaces for stealthing prevention and response through educational initiatives, policy reforms, and support systems. By implementing targeted strategies, colleges can in turn foster a culture of informed consent, reduce the occurrence of stealthing, and provide survivors with the necessary resources to seek help and restorative justice.

Several institutions have adopted effective programs to address sexual violence and thus expanding to incorporate stealthing can be a feasible next step. For instance, the Enhanced Assess, Acknowledge, Act program [30], a 12 h educational initiative, has been shown to significantly reduce the risk of sexual assault among college women through rigorous evaluation. Additionally, the Green Dot Bystander Intervention program [31] trains students to recognize and intervene in potential instances of sexual violence, promoting a proactive campus culture. Campaigns like “It’s On Us” further engage the campus community in awareness and prevention efforts [32]. As such, by integrating such evidence-based programs, colleges can enhance their preventive measures against stealthing and related forms of sexual misconduct

While the recommendations in this paper are primarily situated within the U.S. higher education context, they may also be adaptable to other countries, particularly those with similar institutional structures or legal frameworks addressing sexual violence.

4. Institutional Strategies to Combat Stealthing

To effectively combat stealthing, campuses across the U.S., especially public institutions receiving federal funding can adopt a multifaceted approach that includes policy updates, staff training, and survivor-centered support services. By implementing clear reporting systems, enforcing zero-tolerance policies, and ensuring cultural competency, college campuses can create a safer environment and foster accountability. The following strategies outline key institutional actions in addressing this issue.

4.1. Update Policies, Enforce Zero-Tolerance, and Streamline Reporting

4.1.1. Revise Sexual Misconduct Policies

Action: Update policies to explicitly define stealthing as a violation, even if not mentioned in Title IX. Align it under sexual harassment or assault categories. Why: Title IX requires institutions to address all forms of sexual violence. Explicitly defining stealthing ensures that survivors have legal avenues for reporting and support.

In the United States, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 is a federal civil rights law that prohibits sex-based discrimination in any educational program receiving federal funding. While originally associated with gender equity in sports and education access, Title IX has evolved to encompass institutional responsibility in responding to sexual harassment and sexual violence on college campuses. Under Title IX, colleges and universities are obligated to investigate and address incidents of sexual misconduct, including non-consensual acts like stealthing, when they affect students’ access to education [33,34]. This makes Title IX a potentially powerful, though currently underutilized, mechanism for addressing stealthing within higher education settings. Even for international audiences, this reflects a broader institutional accountability model that may inform policy in similar educational contexts.

4.1.2. Incorporate State-Specific Laws

Action: Integrate relevant state and local laws regarding stealthing into campus policies and Title IX procedures. Why: States like California, Maine, and Washington have laws on stealthing. This ensures compliance with both state and federal regulations.

4.1.3. Develop Clear and Accessible Reporting Systems

Action: Establish easy-to-use, anonymous reporting channels (e.g., online forms) and clearly outline them in Title IX policy documents. Why: A clear reporting system helps students report incidents safely, promoting transparency and accountability.

4.1.4. Enforce a Zero-Tolerance Policy

Action: Create and enforce a zero-tolerance policy on stealthing with clear consequences for violators, from disciplinary actions to expulsion. Why: A zero-tolerance policy shows the institution’s commitment to addressing stealthing and helps deter perpetrators.

4.1.5. Ensure Consistent Communication of Policies

Action: Regularly update and communicate policies through campus-wide communications, orientations, and Title IX-specific training sessions for all students, faculty, and staff. Ensure transparency in the enforcement process, providing accessible updates to the campus community regarding the outcomes of investigations and disciplinary actions, while maintaining respect for survivors’ privacy. Why: Ongoing communication creates a campus culture of awareness, accountability, and support for survivors. Transparency in enforcement builds trust within the campus community and demonstrates the institution’s seriousness in holding violators accountable.

4.2. Empower Staff to Identify and Address Stealthing

4.2.1. Train Faculty and Staff on Stealthing Identification and Response

Action: Provide mandatory training for faculty, staff, and campus security on recognizing stealthing and understanding the reporting process. Why: Empowering staff with knowledge helps them identify potential cases and respond effectively, ensuring swift support for survivors.

4.2.2. Create a Specialized Task Force or Point of Contact

Action: Designate a specific team or individual (e.g., Title IX coordinator, ombuds person) to handle stealthing cases, providing expertise and oversight. Why: A dedicated point of contact ensures focused attention, streamlined support, and a more consistent response to stealthing incidents.

4.2.3. Implement Regular Awareness Campaigns

Action: Run awareness campaigns across campus, including posters, emails, and workshops, to keep stealthing a visible issue. Why: Ongoing campaigns help maintain visibility around stealthing, ensuring the community understands its implications and the resources available. It is also essential to differentiate between condom refusal and stealthing; the latter involves the intentional removal of a condom during intercourse, which is a form of sexual violence. While condom use resistance is not inherently linked to stealthing, it can be a precursor to the latter, particularly when coercive tactics are employed to circumvent condom use. Educating both potential perpetrators and the broader community about these dynamics, especially in the context of condom use resistance in women and men who have sex with men, is critical. This comprehensive approach not only fosters a deeper understanding of stealthing but also enhances prevention efforts by addressing the behaviors that contribute to this form of sexual violence.

4.3. Implement Survivor-Centered Support Services

4.3.1. Develop Confidential Survivor Support Networks

Action: Establish a network of confidential support services, including counseling, legal aid, and medical resources, specifically tailored for survivors of stealthing. Ensure these services are easily accessible and well-publicized on campus. Ensure that all support services and protocols are culturally competent and inclusive of diverse student backgrounds, including LGBTQ+ students, students of color, and international students. Why: Survivors need immediate, empathetic support to heal and navigate the challenges post-incident. Cultural competency ensures that survivors from diverse backgrounds feel respected and supported, fostering an inclusive environment that addresses the needs of all students.

4.3.2. Integrate Survivor-Centered Protocols in Title IX Procedures

Action: Integrate survivor-centered protocols in Title IX procedures, ensuring that survivors’ needs and concerns are prioritized in the investigation and resolution process. Why: Title IX requires that all students are treated fairly, but survivor-centered protocols go a step further by ensuring that the specific needs of survivors of stealthing are met in a supportive and respectful manner.

4.3.3. Ongoing Strategic Evaluation of Implemented Measures

Action: Regular evaluations through campus-wide surveys, focus groups, and feedback to assess the effectiveness of stealthing prevention and response strategies. Why: Gathering data on stealthing prevalence, student awareness, and support services allows college campuses to make informed, data-driven decisions, continuously improving policies and practices to better address the needs of survivors and the broader campus community.

Addressing stealthing on college campuses requires a comprehensive and proactive approach, involving clear policy revisions, staff training, and robust survivor-centered support services. Through these strategies, campuses can work towards reducing stealthing and improving campus safety overall.

5. Overcoming Institutional Resource Challenges

One of the primary foreseeable challenges in providing robust support for combatting stealthing is the issue of limited resources and funding. Many campuses may struggle to allocate sufficient budgets for specialized services, particularly when dealing with niche issues like stealthing, which may not be explicitly addressed in existing funding or policy frameworks. This can result in a lack of dedicated counselors, peer advocates, and educational programs focused on the trauma related to stealthing. Additionally, because stealthing is often overlooked compared to other forms of sexual violence, it can be difficult to justify the expenditure required to develop and maintain specialized services. Overcoming this challenge requires creative solutions that engage both institutional resources and external partnerships.

To address this, college campuses can explore partnerships with local sexual assault organizations or national groups dedicated to combating sexual violence. These academic-community partnerships [35] can help share the burden of providing services and offer access to additional training and resources for students. Additionally, campuses can create opportunities for students, especially for those in professional courses requiring experiential learning, to actively contribute to the support system by offering internships or volunteer roles through the health center or Title IX office. These roles could involve training as peer advocates or providing survivor support under the guidance of trained professionals. In turn, student advocates not only meet practices requirements, but also make meaningful contributions to the institution’s efforts to combat stealthing. Furthermore, faculty can integrate stealthing awareness into course curricula through experiential learning [36], encouraging students to create public education campaigns, research projects, or advocacy initiatives aimed at increasing campus-wide assessment and literacy on stealthing and in turn empowering civic engagement. These creative, low-cost initiatives not only enhance survivor support but also foster a culture of campus-wide responsibility and education.

6. Conclusions

College campuses are ideal places to combat stealthing, given their role as environments where young adults are navigating sexual exploration and relationships. These institutions have a unique opportunity to foster a culture of informed consent, provide critical education, and offer survivor-centered support systems that can significantly reduce the occurrence of stealthing.

Through proactive efforts, such as clear policies, comprehensive training, accessible reporting mechanisms, developing community-academic partnerships, and engaging students in advocacy roles, college campuses can create a unified approach to effective prevention and response. While resource limitations may pose challenges, academic institutions can leverage creative solutions and external collaborations to build robust systems that address both the immediate and long-term needs of survivors. Ultimately, addressing stealthing on college campuses requires a multifaceted, institutional commitment to fostering safety, accountability, transparency, and a campus culture that values respect and consent.