A thread on student-faculty romances.

I want to explain something, for the sake of the profession of philosophy, the field of academia, and the health of workplace gender relations more broadly:

Conflating potential abuses of power with actual abuses of power benefits no one.
Recently a profile of me described how 12 yrs ago my husband Arnold, then a first year graduate student taking one of my courses, told me he was in love with me.
I said I felt the same, we decided nothing could happen between us, and the next day I got on a plane for New York...
(I am going to leave out the parts of the story connected to my divorce, you can read about them in the profile, this thread is focused on the power issue)

From NY, I called a number of colleagues and looked into the university's rules. I learned that there was a protocol:
(a) we needed to announce the relationship to the department chair
(b) I needed to immediately remove myself from any advisory role in relation to Arnold
(c) Arnold needed to meet weekly with a counselor who would check in with him to make sure he was not being mistreated
We did (a) & (b), and we did them BEFORE beginning a romantic relationship. First thing when I came back from NY, Arnold & I met w/department chair & Arnold additionally had a meeting with the DGS & the department chair. A colleague agreed to grade Arnold's paper for the class.
From then on I'd exit faculty meetings whenever he was discussed. (I do the same in relation to my ex-husband, Ben, & same is true for other married couples in the dept.)
Arnold met with the counselor as required.
Eventually we married, had a kid, & lived happily ever after.
All of this is causing outrage, 12 years after the fact, among people, some of whom have have long known about it & did not seem disturbed until now. Which is probably just a result of people being worked up by the profile and looking for an angle on which I come out a villain.
In general, such "takes" are worth ignoring, but here I am worried that the prominence of this case, and the reaction to it in philosophy, could lead to a bad cultural shift, encouraging and exacerbating the abuse of power in the context of workplace romantic relationships.
So let me say what should've been obvious to all:

This is what a GOOD case looks like.

This is what it looks like when a situation that COULD lead to an abuse of power DOESN'T lead to an abuse of power.

Being open & honest & following rules can work out well for everyone: yay!
I am writing this thread because I fear that having a whole bunch of people (many of whom have some prominence in the profession) equate my case with the worst forms of abuse will drive people towards a culture of secrecy.
A blanket policy of stigmatizing even rule-abiding behavior induces secrecy and shame, which is precisely what serial abusers rely on.
(By announcing the relationship, a record is created; this is important for allowing the university to intervene when it sees a bad pattern.)
Abusive romantic relations between faculty and students are a genuine problem, it is irresponsible to willfully exacerbate this problem because you want an outlet for some negative energy towards me.
The End

Recommended by
Recommendations from around the web and our community.

A great thread. Question for @AgnesCallard: Yes, you followed the @UChicago rules. But as a philosopher, do you deem those rules too strict, too lax, or just right?