Landmark Police Research on Nonconsensual Insemination Raises Renewed Questions About Sexual Assault Investigations

Police research, inconsistent state laws, gaps in sex ed, and a lack of cultural accountability inspire "loveMANia," a research-based multimedia art gallery.

NEW YORK, NY, UNITED STATES, November 9, 2026 /EINPresswire.com/ -- More than fourteen years after groundbreaking legal scholarship examined nonconsensual insemination as a form of intimate partner violence, questions remain about whether American law enforcement adequately recognizes and investigates violations of sexual and reproductive autonomy.

The 2012 publication, Nonconsensual Insemination: Intimate Partner Violence, Patriarchy, Police Education and Policy, by Carmen M. Cusack and Grace Telesco, challenges assumptions about consent to intercourse versus consent to insemination while examining how patriarchal attitudes may influence police investigations.

Telesco, a retired New York City Police Department lieutenant, helped pioneer domestic violence education within the NYPD and chaired the Behavioral Science Department at the New York City Police Academy. The research presents ten hypothetical scenarios involving nonconsensual insemination, identifying evidence investigators should consider when evaluating potential battery, sexual assault, and domestic violence offenses.

Bestselling author, journalist, women's advocate, and Presidential Lifetime Achievement Award recipient Jenny Carrington is bringing renewed attention to the scholarship through loveMANia, an evolving, research-based multimedia art gallery developed under her artistic pseudonym, Laura London. The initiative explores the intersection of sexual autonomy, inconsistent legal protections, police education, psychological trauma, and cultural accountability.

Consent to Intercourse Is Not Consent to Everything

In her companion publication, Nonconsensual Insemination: Battery, Cusack argues that ejaculation without a partner's express consent should be recognized as a distinct violation potentially actionable as battery or sexual battery. Her scholarship challenges the assumption that participation in sexual intercourse, including unprotected intercourse, necessarily authorizes insemination. An individual may consent to intercourse while withholding consent to internal ejaculation. Contraceptive use, prior intimacy, and participation in other sexual activities do not necessarily establish agreement to every subsequent act.

Sexual autonomy encompasses far more than insemination. Consent to kissing, touching, foreplay, penetration, and other intimate activities is equally fundamental. This examination focuses specifically on nonconsensual insemination because its legal treatment raises questions about reproductive consequences and violations that may occur during otherwise consensual encounters.

Although Cusack's proposed legal interpretation has not been uniformly adopted, it raises an important distinction: The absence of a specific criminal prohibition does not establish the presence of meaningful consent.

Six States, Different Laws: The Geography of Sexual Consent

Across the United States, rape, sexual assault, sexual abuse, and battery are defined through different statutory frameworks. Yet the provisions reviewed below generally do not expressly establish nonconsensual internal ejaculation during otherwise consensual intercourse as an independent criminal offense.

California — Consent and Sexual Battery

Penal Code §§ 261.6 and 261.7 address voluntary, informed consent and clarify that requesting contraception alone does not establish consent in specified prosecutions. Criminal battery (§ 242), sexual battery (§ 243.4), and civil sexual battery (Civil Code § 1708.5) provide additional protections, including civil remedies for certain forms of nonconsensual condom removal. These provisions do not expressly create a standalone criminal offense for nonconsensual internal ejaculation. Instead it may be prosecuted under sexual battery or rape.

Arizona — Sexual Assault and Lack of Consent

A.R.S. §§ 13-1401, 13-1404, and 13-1406 define sexual contact, sexual abuse, sexual assault, and lack of consent. They do not expressly establish nonconsensual insemination during otherwise consensual intercourse as a distinct offense, leaving questions about how existing provisions apply to specific circumstances, although not necessarily excluding non-consensual insemination as a punishable act.

New York — Multiple Offenses, Different Consent Requirements

Penal Law Article 130 establishes various sexual offenses with differing statutory elements. Significant amendments effective in September 2024 revised several offense definitions. The provisions reviewed still do not expressly identify nonconsensual internal ejaculation during otherwise consensual intercourse as a separate offense even in the home state of the research conducted. Advocacy may thus fall on the victim to meet statutory requirements for unwanted internal ejaculation under the existing framework.

New Jersey — Affirmative Permission

N.J.S.A. 2C:14-2 addresses sexual penetration involving coercion or the absence of affirmative, freely given permission. While the law recognizes consent to specific sexual conduct, it does not expressly establish nonconsensual internal ejaculation as an independent sexual-assault offense. This follows the pattern of the other states listed in that there is no pre-defined penal code for non-consensual insemination, leaving interpretation of this act up to law enforcement and/or the district attorney's office.

Washington — Reproductive Autonomy and Protective Devices

Washington's 2024 legislation established civil remedies for certain forms of nonconsensual protective-device removal, tampering, or deception. Separate criminal provisions address unauthorized reproductive-material implantation in assisted reproduction. Neither establishes a general offense encompassing every instance of nonconsensual internal ejaculation during otherwise consensual intercourse, in line with the policies of the states previously discussed.

Wisconsin — Ejaculation Expressly Recognized in Sexual-Assault Law

Wisconsin provides a particularly significant statutory example. Wis. Stat. § 940.225 expressly recognizes certain intentional acts of penile ejaculation onto another person's clothed or unclothed body as sexual contact when specified elements are satisfied. Section 940.225(3)(b) addresses sexual contact without consent involving ejaculation, while Wisconsin Criminal Jury Instruction 1218B provides a corresponding framework for courts.

Unlike the other five states examined, Wisconsin expressly identifies ejaculation within its criminal sexual-contact provisions. Wisconsin demonstrates that legislatures can explicitly recognize ejaculation as legally distinct sexual conduct.

Together, these distinctions raise questions about public understanding, police training, and the consistency of legal protections across state lines.

Even Prosecutors Disagree

In 2014, Cusack published 50 State Survey of Prosecutors' Willingness to Prosecute Nonconsensual Insemination. Of 56 prosecutors responding from 34 states, approximately 43% indicated they would prosecute the hypothetical scenario presented. Among those willing to prosecute, 75% were women; among those declining, approximately 81% were men. A 2026 study published in the Journal of Public Health Policy further examined inconsistencies among state civil laws addressing nonconsensual condom removal, including differences in terminology, consent standards, and remedies.

Are Americans Being Taught What Consent Means?

Legal inconsistencies are compounded by uneven sexual education.

According to KFF (an independent source for health policy research, polling, and news) in a July 2025 analysis, only 29 states and Washington, D.C., required sex education, while only 16 states and D.C. expressly required consent instruction. A separate 2025 academic analysis found that 42 states mandated at least one sexual-education content area, illustrating how reported figures vary with the definition of sex education. But requiring sexual-health instruction does not necessarily mean students receive comprehensive education about boundaries, coercion, reproductive autonomy, and healthy relationships. How can society expect individuals to navigate complex sexual boundaries when consent is not consistently taught and legal definitions vary across jurisdictions?

When Trauma Responses Become the Focus Instead of the Alleged Violation

In 2022, the U.S. Department of Justice updated its guidance on preventing gender bias in sexual assault and domestic violence investigations, emphasizing trauma-informed interviewing, proper classification, evidence preservation, and the avoidance of victim-blaming.

An especially difficult question arises when someone reporting sexual violence experiences prolonged distress, panic, anger, repeated attempts to obtain acknowledgment, or difficulty disengaging from a person they believe harmed them. Such behavior may occur following trauma, but does not independently establish an assault or excuse threatening, stalking, or harassing conduct.

The institutional challenge is whether law enforcement can evaluate subsequent conduct independently while also investigating the underlying allegation fairly and with appropriate attention to trauma. When attention shifts exclusively toward a complainant's reactions, the original alleged violation risks being overlooked. Institutional responses can also intensify distress when complainants feel disbelieved, silenced, or deprived of meaningful participation.

Whose voice counts when accounts conflict? Whose experiences receive recognition? And how can institutions prevent existing power imbalances from influencing whose allegations receive serious consideration? Trauma-informed investigation requires sensitivity without compromising evidence, due process, or anyone's legal rights.

Beyond the Law: Who Defines Accountability?

For much of modern history, legislatures, police institutions, and courts were predominantly male, while women had limited influence over the laws governing their sexual and reproductive autonomy. Although representation and legal protections have evolved, the historical imbalance raises continuing questions about whose experiences shape definitions of sexual harm.

Legal compliance and ethical accountability are not synonymous. A person's refusal to acknowledge wrongdoing should not exempt them from accountability. Yet accountability must be grounded in evidence, fair procedures, and established responsibilities rather than compelled expressions of remorse. Punishment can establish consequences, deter misconduct, and protect others. But punishment does not necessarily produce transformation.

The deeper challenge is cultural: creating a society in which respect for women's bodily autonomy becomes an internalized responsibility rather than merely a response to legal consequences. That transformation cannot depend on men becoming guardians of women. It requires men becoming accountable directly to women while respecting women's autonomy. Women's voices must matter not only within intimate relationships, but also in the creation, interpretation, and enforcement of public policy.

loveMANia: Where Art, Evidence, and Sexual Autonomy Intersect

These questions form part of the intellectual foundation of loveMANia, a research-based multimedia art gallery by Laura London, the artistic pseudonym of Jenny Carrington.

Over a decade in development, the exhibition explores sexuality, creativity, intimacy, psychological trauma, power dynamics, objectification, consent, and cultural accountability. Its central Parts collection features 24-by-24-inch oil paintings exploring the human body through intimate, fragmented perspectives, challenging viewers to reconsider how bodies become sexualized, celebrated, objectified, or condemned. What distinguishes loveMANia is its proposed integration of visual art with documentary and legal material: police reports, court records, research publications, correspondence, narrative accounts, and evidence related to intimate relationships and sexual violence.

Through curated, appropriately anonymized materials, the gallery aims to place institutional documentation alongside personal experiences, allowing audiences to examine the distance between what individuals report, what institutions recognize, and what the law can establish. The exhibition examines the broader spectrum of sexual autonomy, including consent to touching, penetration, reproductive acts, consensual BDSM, polyamory, and the boundaries between consensual power exchange and abuse. Its multimedia components include paintings, photography, poetry, documentary narratives, and interactive installations designed to encourage reflection on whose experiences are believed and whose voices shape the meaning of intimate encounters.

For Carrington, art offers a means of reclaiming narrative agency when conventional systems cannot fully communicate the emotional, psychological, or cultural dimensions of an experience. The evolving initiative also envisions accompanying literary works and advocacy networks exploring public participation, victim-centered innovation, and improvements to the justice system.

A Call for Education, Recognition, and Cultural Change

Fourteen years after the Cusack–Telesco publication, its questions remain relevant to lawmakers, police departments, educators, researchers, and advocates. The opportunity extends beyond clearer legislation and improved police training. It includes meaningful consent education, more informed institutional responses, and a cultural transformation that recognizes bodily autonomy as an ongoing human responsibility. The ultimate goal is not simply to punish violations after they occur, but to develop a society in which autonomy is understood, respected, and protected before harm occurs.

About Jenny Carrington

Jenny Carrington is a bestselling author, credentialed journalist, multidisciplinary artist, and longtime advocate for women, mental health, and social change. She received the U.S. President's Lifetime Achievement Award recognizing more than 5,000 hours of volunteer service. Her work explores human connection, individual autonomy, psychological resilience, and cultural transformation.

Selected Research: Cusack & Telesco (2012); Cusack (2012, 2014); Becerra & Turner (2026); U.S. Department of Justice (2022); KFF (2025).

Jenny Carrington
GTI Enterprises