SHRC deserved better

The AMS acted poorly when they attempted to pressure a club into determining their entire future in three days.

On March 13, the Sexual Health Resource Centre (SHRC) executive was told they had 72 hours to decide whether they would become an SGPS club or an AMS service next year.

The AMS had previously sought a change to its constitution, which would prohibit clubs from being “primarily revenue generating entities”, in order to avoid insurance-related risks.

It’s understandable why the switch to the SHRC’s structure was necessary, but the AMS could have navigated the situation better.

Clubs shouldn’t be rushed into making a quick decision about their future simply because the AMS wasn’t aware of existing risks.

The situation required quick movement on the AMS’s part, and immediate contact with the SHRC executive. Instead, a meeting was scheduled for four days after the AMS made initial contact. This eventually gave the club just three days to make a sensitive decision.

It’s unclear what would have become of the SHRC’s services — including the sale of sexual health products, accompaniment services to abortion procedures and assistance for sexual assault survivors.

Pressing for a quick decision disregards how these services greatly benefit many students.

The AMS could take a more supportive stance if such events arise in future to assist clubs and services in making productive decisions.

Journal Editorial Board


All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s)-in-Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be contacted, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to

When commenting, be considerate and respectful of writers and fellow commenters. Try to stay on topic. Spam and comments that are hateful or discriminatory will be deleted. Our full commenting policy can be read here.