• We will be taking the server down at approximately 3:30 AM ET on Wednesday, 10/8/25. We have a hard drive that is in the early stages of failure and this is necessary to prevent data loss. We hope to be back up and running quickly, however this process could take some time.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should non disclosure agreements generally be legally enforced in sex harassment cases?

Should non disclosure agreements generally be legally enforced in sex harassment cases?

  • Total voters
    12
X Factor

X Factor

Anti-Socialist
Dungeon Master
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
66,793
Reaction score
39,614
Location
El Paso Strong
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Non-disclosure agreements should not protect and enable predators.


Edit: Yes, I read that article with all the caveats. I appreciate those problems.
 
Last edited:
They shouldn’t be able to prevent disclosure of criminal activity.
 
Non-disclosure agreements leave a bad taste in my mouth; the idea that someone is capable of writing up paperwork that can legally punish someone for speaking about a past event is just unsettling to me. My thoughts on nondisclosure agreements aside, I don't have nearly enough of an understanding of the legal system to say whether or not these should exist.

It seems to me that banning certain things from nondisclosure agreements would open them to a massive amount of exposure, thus defeating the entire purpose of such agreements.
 
Yes.

If someone enters into an agreement and the other party meets the requirements of the agreement to the profit of the silenced party, then it should be enforced.

Note, the penalties for violating a non-disclosure agreement are only financial, as this is a civil matter, not a criminal matter.

Why shouldn't the party, who accepted the funds only to later break the agreement, pay the penalty?
 
Last edited:
Depends if they were extorted or coerced, and if there was a legal "meeting of the minds" between the actual people involved. If one of the individuals involved had no knowledge of it, then it most certainly would be vulnerable to legal challenge.
 
Skeptic Bob said:
They shouldn’t be able to prevent disclosure of criminal activity.
Click to expand...

Frankly I think anyone should be able to, basically, bargain away anything they have of value, and that could include information or even just unsubstantiated allegations; and once a contractual relationship has been entered into by both parties, the strong presumption should be to uphold the terms of the agreement.
 
Captain Adverse said:
Yes.

If someone enters into an agreement and the other party meets the requirements of the agreement to the profit of the silenced party, then it should be enforced.

Note, the penalties for violating a non-disclosure agreement are only financial, as this is a civil matter, not a criminal matter.

Why shouldn't the party, who accepted the funds only to later break the agreement, pay the penalty?
Click to expand...

One common misunderstanding of contracts is that they create new laws. They don't. At the end of the day they must observe existing law.
 
DiAnna said:
Depends if they were extorted or coerced, and if there was a legal "meeting of the minds" between the actual people involved. If one of the individuals involved had no knowledge of it, then it most certainly would be vulnerable to legal challenge.
Click to expand...

A non-disclosure agreement is a contract. Essentially an offer and an acceptance.

One party offers something, usually money but it can be something else the other party values, in exchange for some service, in this case an agreement to keep silent.

It is not enforceable if it is coerced, and both parties must be legally capable of entering into the agreement. But the burden is on the party who claims they were coerced to show it, since they did accept something of value in exchange.
 
Last edited:
X Factor said:
Should non disclosure agreements generally be legally enforced in sex harassment cases?
Click to expand...

Skeptic Bob said:
They shouldn’t be able to prevent disclosure of criminal activity.
Click to expand...

Praxas said:
No NDA should prevent disclosure of a illegal activity.
Click to expand...

Sexual harassment is a violation of company policies, not a crime, right? I dunno what to vote yet, still thinking about it, but that's just something that popped into my head from reading your comments. It's sexual assault that's a crime, is what I'm tracking.
 
Captain Adverse said:
Yes.

If someone enters into an agreement and the other party meets the requirements of the agreement to the profit of the silenced party, then it should be enforced.

Note, the penalties for violating a non-disclosure agreement are only financial, as this is a civil matter, not a criminal matter.

Why shouldn't the party, who accepted the funds only to later break the agreement, pay the penalty?
Click to expand...
I actually agree.

Once one enters into a legal agreement, the agreement should stand. If you're shallow enough to settle out of court with child molesters, perverts, and rapists, you weren't deserving of justice to begin with.

That's one of the things I deffer from with my fellow liberals. Women like Gretchen Carlson are not hero's, as they help enable predators by signing NDA for cash.
 
X Factor said:
Frankly I think anyone should be able to, basically, bargain away anything they have of value, and that could include information or even just unsubstantiated allegations; and once a contractual relationship has been entered into by both parties, the strong presumption should be to uphold the terms of the agreement.
Click to expand...

Seems like people who sign an NDA with a criminal, promising silence in exchange for money, are making themselves accessories to crime. The crime they were paid to keep mum about. And the future crime which their silence enabled. Someone down the road should be able to sue for damages for the accomplices not getting the predator out of circulation.
 
Any NDA intending to shield/cloak a sexual crime should be considered null and void.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom