Mandatory reporting (MR) policies have been implemented at universities and colleges across the US. While described as a tool to combat campus sexual assault, there is great concern about MR policies which require responsible employees to report to a university official and its adverse effects on victim-survivors. Using a survey of the general public, this research analyzes public perceptions evaluating three types of MR policy approaches -- universal, selective, and student-directed. Descriptively, over half of the respondents said they supported universal MR followed by student-directed MR. Multinomial logistic regression results showed that when the public considers the consequences of MR on victim-survivors, the odds of supporting universal MR decrease while the odds of supporting student-directed MR increases. Findings suggest the public is more nuanced in their assessment of MR policy approaches when asked to consider the implications of those policies on victim-survivors.