In a Peer Mentoring Program designed to help students build community and create a sense of belonging. A First-Year Mentee Casually Discloses a crush on the Program’s graduate assistant to her Mentor. Her mentor reports the disclosure to the program coordinator, who has to schedule a meeting with the mentee to address the issue. Based on the way the discussion played out, the mentee ultimately found the exchange shaming and discriminatory, she threatened to withdraw and the Program Director had to intervene. The case tests policy-neutral communication, employee religious expression limitations and potential discrimination risks while maintaining trust, belonging and clear student-staff boundaries.

Keywords:

Religious Expression, Student-Staff Boundaries, Discrimination, LGBTQIA+

Characters

Aaliyah Morgan (She/Her) – First year mentee, first generation, scholarship recipient, questioning sexuality.

Taylor Johnson (She/Her) – Junior mentor, signed a privacy-with-referral agreement, protective of program norms and integrity.

Kayla Williams (She/Her) – Graduate Assistant coordinating logistics, has grading authority over Aaliyah, concerned about rumor optics.

Sara Whitfield (She/Her) – Program Coordinator, devout Christian, intends to prevent boundary issues but blends policy with personal religious advice.

Dr Jordan Ellis (they/them) – Program Director, trained in restorative facilitation.

Institutional Context

Mighty University (MU) is a large public research institution located in the southeastern United States, enrolling approximately 25,000 undergraduate and 7,000 graduate students. MU serves a student population that is socioeconomically, culturally, and racially diverse with approximately 58% White, 20% Black/African American, 10% Latinx, 6% Asian/Asian American, and a growing international population representing more than 50 countries.

The University is committed to Inclusive excellence, student success, and belonging. Particularly for first-generation and marginalized students. The student success center, where this case unfolds, houses several initiatives including peer mentoring, academic coaching and first-year transition programs.

Case

The check-in was on the calendar – 30 minutes, every other Monday. Taylor Johnson keeps these meetings predictable. She makes sure to discuss the highs/lows of the week, classes, campus navigation, then anything ‘awkward or sticky’ her mentee feels might need staff support.

Halfway in, Aaliyah Morgan hesitates, runs her hand through her hair and says quietly, “This is embarrassing but I have a crush on Kayla the graduate assistant, I know because I get butterflies when she sends me emails.”

Taylor nods, thanks Aaliyah for trusting her with that information. She then clarifies the ground rules they both signed: mentor conversations are private with referral-not secret. “If something could blur roles or put you at risk, I have to loop in a staff member for guidance so we keep you safe,” Taylor explains. Aaliyah agrees she doesn’t want drama, just clarity.

That afternoon, Taylor meets privately with Sara Whitfield, the program coordinator, and shares the essential information needed for staff intervention: that Aaliyah disclosed having a crush on the graduate assistant, that the feelings are not being acted upon, and that Aaliyah simply wanted clarity and support navigating the situation. Taylor wants to protect everyone and follow the student-employee boundaries policy, which warns against (but does not explicitly prohibit) relationships where a power imbalance exists or could be reasonably perceived.

Sara invites Aaliyah to a meeting next Thursday to discuss the situation. The tone initially is neutral: Sara points to the one-page Consensual Relationship / Student employee Boundaries summary. Sara reminds Aaliyah that GAs must maintain distance to avoid the appearance of influence and offer support pathways if feelings get complicated. Aaliyah listens, cheeks flushed, but she is calm and composed.

Then Sara adds, “As a Christian, I also advise you against same-sex relationships. They complicate things.” The sentence lands like a verdict. Aaliyah’s composure slips. She hears judgement about who she might be, not just what the policy requires. She mumbles thanks and leaves the meeting earlier than planned. Later that evening she emails Sara stating that she felt humiliated and intimidated. She’s considering withdrawing from the program.

By midday Friday, Sara has shared information with Dr. Jordan Ellis, the program director. Dr. Ellis has Aaliyah’s email, Taylor’s notes, and Sara’s account. Jordan schedules separate check-ins: a listening session with Aaliyah. Coaching with Sara on role neutral language and religion in the workplace limits. They also meet with Kayla Williams to brief her on the situation and offer guidance for her concerns about rumors that may begin about this situation.

Discussion Questions

1. In a public university setting, where is the boundary between an employee’s religious freedom and the duty to deliver non-discriminatory, role-neutral services to students?
2. If the Graduate Assistant’s responsibilities are adjusted, or the mentoring structure is altered as a result of this scenario. Identify and explain
   1. Why these changes may Harm or disadvantage the mentee, even if the intention is protective
   2. What alternative approaches the program could use
3. If concerns or rumors begin circulating among students about staff pushing religious beliefs or mishandling boundaries, develop a brief public-facing statement the program can use to address the situation while protecting privacy.
4. Should there be a separate discrimination review of the meeting between Sara and Aaliyah? Should the case be escalated to the Title IX office? Why or why not?

Author Biography

Uwem Antia (He/Him/His) – I am a second-year Master’s student in Counselor Education at Clemson University and a native of Nigeria. I work as the Graduate Assistant for Recruitment and Retention in the College of Science, where I support programming, mentoring, and inclusive student engagement. My professional interests in student affairs include program development, retention initiatives, leadership development, and creating environments that foster belonging and student success