In much of the literature and online references to the University - X Ombuds Office, it is stated that the office closed in 2004 due to the retirement of the senior ombudsman, G. This is not the full story. In fact, it is a revision that erases the contributions and lived experiences of those who worked in the office during that time—most notably, Amelia Frank before me, and myself.
The truth is that I was asked by someone within the Vice Chancellor’s office to step forward as a whistleblower. At that time, I was the only one consistently present in the office, taking on the largest chunk of seeing clients, and developing writing and research under the mentorship of Stanley V. Anderson. I’m sorry, but the fact is, once I was trained the boys stopped coming to work and Dr. W. thought it would be okay for the Associate Ombuds to go to Paris for a month and be paid beyond his vacation time.
At this time, I was naive, and unaware that perhaps Dr. W. was working in a different way, in the field, gathering information, and this opportunity to get so much experience, was actually a part of my training.
At this time, I had a friend who worked in the VC office, and she listened and witnessed and watched, and encouraged me to say something. She indicated she had talked to her superior, the VC, and he encouraged me, through her, to come forward as a whistleblower.
It is now, I can clearly see, on some level, this was something else by design.
Our office was truly a place of refuge, working in alignment with the standards of practice. I was made aware at that time, that someone in this same upper office wanted to work in this office.
Sure enough, when the office was closed for budget considerations, this individual was installed.
It was only this year, when we met with some old friends, and the wife of the family talked about retiring from this University after 30 years or so reflected what the office had become. She expressed, that now, what they do, is they report to the Chancellor’s Office who the trouble makers are.
It is simply, the way I see it, a way of reducing costs of potential litigation. They use the office to protect themselves, rather than be true to the nature of the office itself. I had come to the conclusion that the Ombuds model, in this form, as Campus Ombuds was deeply flawed, having heard from colleagues in the field, that this at times happened.
If the person who is the ethics officer, impartial, neutral, and confidential is paid by the institution in which it is serving as the “watchdog” so to speak, unless the individual is very high integrity, and willing to “fall on the sword” if necessary to stay true to an ethical core, then the pressure from the food source can conceivably impact the work, and lead to what I would identify as a “corrupt” model.
At this time, I was likely the first Hawaiian to be working in a campus ombuds situation, and may have been the first Hawaiian to be engaging in ombuds scholarship with a mentor who was seen as a giant in the field of ombuds scholarship and one of the early scholars.
I was charged with organizing his files, read them all, supplemented it with more reading, and did what my indigenous intelligence along with the other ways of thinking and being from my ancestral lines, and had an explosive creative reaction and begin to see things in the existing literature that was missing, and began to research and write and fill in the gaps.
Additionally, the clients found my work, at first under supervision by the two senior ombudsman, then alone, they found it to be extremely helpful.
In hindsight, I perhaps should not have blown the whistle, and stepped forward, given the costs to my body, and the insidious, evil I would almost say, nature of the academic institution and the depths it will go to to protect itself, but it taught me a valuable lesson about the nature of hierarchical institutions tied to private funding, and government funding, with its own very deep dark secrets in relation to a deeper story I set aside for this moment.
It set me back into a more fully creative path. While the experience destroyed my career, and destroyed my confidence in being able to function in a higher level job, I came to an understanding, at that time, they never would have let me risen.
Who I was as an indigenous individual in a woman’s body was too big of a threat to the system itself, I was the very medicine it needed.
Life spit me out where I needed to be, and I am grateful for that.
I must be clear: it is never acceptable for a senior ombudsman—no matter how celebrated—to physically batter a colleague. Clients became so concerned about my safety they took their concerns directly to the Chancellor’s office. When I brought clear documentation to Human Resources, citing policy and articulating the retaliation, I was told repeatedly, “That’s not retaliation.” Retaliation escalated. I was having difficulty doing my job given the intensity of the retaliation. One day I decided I had to ask him to stop. I made the mistake of standing in the doorway. He used his door like a weapon and bashed it three times against my petite frame with full force before I could get out of the way and run next door. The Campus Police were called, and the office shut down.
Eventually, the office was shut down under the guise of budget constraints, only to be reopened later with different personnel—individuals who, I would come to learn, reported directly to the system. In hindsight, I see I was used. Isolated from other ombuds professionals, overwhelmed by retaliatory tactics, I was strategically removed—just as Amelia Frank before me had been disregarded and her labor erased.
A trusted family friend, recently retired from UC -X , confirmed that she had heard rumors multiple times that the Ombuds Office was being used not as a place of confidential conflict resolution, but as a means to identify and report those “rocking the boat” to the Chancellor's office.
This speaks to a deeper flaw in the ombuds model: that the ombuds is often funded and governed by the very institution it is meant to hold accountable. The hand that feeds the ombuds becomes the hand the ombuds cannot critique. Who is investigating the ombuds alignment to the standards of the field? How many other offices around the country operate this way? I have remained silent for years, but no more. This story deserves to be told—not to cause harm, but to restore integrity. I have also chosen to publish my research and documentation online.
Though this experience destroyed my ombuds career, it also catalyzed my journey home to my Hawaiian roots via an international career in the arts. I was so devastated by what happened I chose to settle into a humble position in a law firm as a receptionist and never really realized my fullest potential in terms of research and writing, but the journey was very good. I have studied the language of my ancestors, healed the wounds I now understand were associated with the Hawaiian genocide, how that rolls forward, and I may have been the first female Hawaiian campus ombuds to engage deeply in the scholarship of the field.
So let me say clearly:
• The UC - X Ombuds Office did not close simply because G. retired.
• The history you read is not complete.
• It is not okay to batter a colleague.
• And it is not okay to erase the contributions and truth of those who stood for ethical ombudsmanship—including Amelia Frank.
My Apologies
I know, for many in the field, given G.’s standing, this came as a betrayal, and that was not my intention. There wasn’t the support and counsel I needed at that time to work through what was going on, and I was exhausted and overly stressed. I simply could not manage the administrative roles as well as working with the bulk of the clients.
If the field of ombudsing is to remain aligned with its core values—confidentiality, neutrality, independence, and informality—it must also have the courage to face its own uncomfortable truths.
To bury something, is perhaps, to be complicit.
With not so much respect for the profession any more, but gratitude for the lessons and the positive experiences that helped shape my path forward.
Once a dancer, always a dancer
G. I see in my literature review, as other ombuds did as well, saw ombudsing as art.
Once an ombuds always an ombuds, but that may grow and evolve and take on a different form with the passing of many moons, and it is bringing me to this and that in this moment.