Are New Anti-Bullying Laws Really Working? Never be bullied into silence. Never allow yourself to be made a victim. Accept no one’s definition of your life, but define yourself,” said British anti-bullying activist Tim Field. These words provide great advice for children who may be victims or potential targets for bullies. The state government is trying to answer the plea for justice and prevention of the rising epidemic of schoolyard bullies, which have been linked to cases of school shootings and suicides.
The impact of bullying is detrimental psychologically for both victims and bullies. Almost every state in the country has implemented new laws that require school districts to enforce anti-bullying programs and prosecute all students who violate the standards set by their legislation. However, the problem with this regulation is that the definitions used for bullying are not concise or in-depth enough to help each individual case due to varying factors such as specific behavioral issues, types of bullying, and causes for the bully’s behavior.
These laws do not work because they violate various student rights and are controversial. There are alarming national statistics related to the school crisis affecting our children. In 2012, Pacer’s National Bullying Prevention Center reported that almost one-third of all students were bullied in some way, totaling close to 13 million children every year (Bullying Statistics”). These numbers reveal a surprising fact: 64% of victims never report their experiences, leaving only a small 36% of children who actually testify about this behavior (“Bullying Statistics”).
According to a study conducted by the Josephson Institute’s Center for Youth Ethics in 2010, 47% of high school students who participated in the survey reported being bullied to some degree. However, the same study also revealed that 50% of those victims had also engaged in bullying behavior themselves (Cloud).
Despite some people believing that bullying is not a more prevalent problem today, most individuals can recall at least one instance of bullying from their own school years.
Although it may be difficult to determine the exact number of students who are victims of this behavior due to the unreliability of children reporting these actions, the problem still persists. It is crucial to prevent our children from experiencing it themselves. By teaching kids about respect, morality, and how to stand up for themselves, we can help them succeed not only in school but also in their future lives.
Pediatricians have changed their policies to include addressing bullying as a major focus for preventing violent behavior in today’s youth (Holt 53). However, some people believe that the behavioral characteristics of bullying are necessary for children’s growth. Survival and competition have been traits of human nature since the beginning of time. The term bully,” used to describe acts of aggression towards others, has been in use since the 1530s (Donegal 33-34).
The idea that survival and competition have always been a part of human nature feeds the perception that bullying” has always been a way to strengthen children and can be used as a learning tool (Kalahar). The older generation’s belief that “we survived bullying and turned out okay” suggests that this form of teaching or learning does not leave any lasting impressions on a child’s psychological state. However, this is untrue. Many researchers in the field of psychology have conducted countless experiments to determine that being a victim of bullying, or even being a bully, can seriously impact a person’s mind and behavior (Holt 57).
Bullying is defined by researchers as repeated acts of aggression, intimidation, or coercion” towards someone who is more vulnerable or defenseless (Ross and Horner). There are multiple types of bullying, both direct and indirect. Direct forms of abuse include verbal actions such as name-calling and teasing, as well as physical actions like pushing, shoving, and hitting. Indirect forms of maltreatment include gossiping and spreading rumors about others, as well as socially rejecting others in front of their peers (Holt 53).
Although there is not only a vague description of bullying, but also the extremity of behavior that is specific to each bully. They may have underlying psychological or physiological reasons for their behavior that cannot be cured by a non-specific program that doesn’t address individual problems. Bullying victims often share similar characteristics such as depression, low self-esteem, shyness, loneliness and an inability to handle direct aggression.
Bullies exhibit behavior patterns that are consistent with extreme anger or criminal activity. Even witnesses who do not intervene have admitted feeling helpless and vulnerable, mindsets that prevention programs aim to avoid (Beran and Shapiro 702). Each state has passed new laws with varying parameters, but all set their own standards on what constitutes bullying. These laws also require school districts to allocate funds from their budgets to educate faculty and students on becoming aware of and preventing bullying in their schools.
This law dictates that administrators must keep an eye on students and report incidents that occur between campuses, school buses, and other areas. School district employees are legally responsible for stopping all inappropriate behavior in their establishments. However, some teachers who are being held accountable are having trouble believing that they are truly helping their students because they feel obligated to report any normal childhood conflicts to the school board as acts of bullying (Cloud).
For example, in 2006, South Carolina passed the Safe School Climate Act to prevent and stop public students from bullying each other. This law defines bullying as any gesture, electronic communication, or written, verbal, physical or sexual act that reasonably causes: a) harm to a student physically or emotionally; damage to a student’s property; placing a student in reasonable fear of personal harm or property damage; b) insulting or demeaning a student or group of students causing substantial disruption in the orderly operation of the school (Terry 96-97).
Is it fair to equate a fellow student stealing and damaging your backpack with repeatedly posting offensive and demeaning comments about someone online? Should the severity of the incident determine whether or not it is reported to the school board and added to a student’s permanent record? According to this Act, teachers are responsible for monitoring and reporting behavior not only on school grounds but also at bus stops, during transportation, and on field trips.
They are also mandated to pursue finding a policy to prevent these actions among students. A survey was given to administrators in South Carolina following these regulations to evaluate the effectiveness of the new school program. However, most teachers found the program unsuccessful for various reasons. Some administrators didn’t completely understand the policies, and students and teachers were unaware that it existed. Additionally, policies weren’t practiced regularly over time (Terry 98).
This information supports the idea that mandated programs alone are not enough to solve the problem of bullying. Evaluations of similar programs required in other states have shown about the same success rate. However, there is a nationwide program that focuses on positive behavior support and has been successful. This intervention-style course prepares students to address inappropriate conduct with a “stop, walk, and talk routine” and emphasizes teaching respectful behavior without using language or terminology directly related to “bullies” (Ross and Horner).
The reason this program has been so successful, aside from its unorthodox concentrations, is that the schools that participated in the study consistently taught their students about bully awareness before implementing this particular program. The philosopher Aristotle once said, “Those who educate children well are more to be honored than those who merely give them life; for the former give them the art of living well. Educators do have a significant influence on children’s lives, but shouldn’t parents also be held responsible for teaching their kids respectful behavior? Why should this problem fall solely on teachers’ shoulders? Parents are the ones who instill manners, respect, and morality in their children. A study conducted on bullying awareness for children affirmed that to make a prevention program work effectively, it is crucial to understand students’ current understanding and sensitivity towards the subject.
The information also verifies that the knowledge provided in the programs would be beneficial when used in conjunction with encouragement from teachers to help raise confidence, genuine concern for what happens among their students, and consistent measures followed after an incident happens (Beran and Shapiro 712-713).
A new study completed by researchers in the Department of Criminal Justice has unveiled new information that bullying affects females differently from males depending on the type and frequency of victimization as well as individual health and psychological issues (Holt 54).
There are also other factors to consider when it comes to bullying. Why do bullies behave the way they do? What are the underlying causes of their actions? It is important to try and understand how a bully selects their victims. Cases of bullying have been reported for a multitude of reasons, including race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, and social or economic standing. Bullies may become more aggressive due to psychological or psychosomatic illnesses such as depression or anxiety disorders (Goldman 214-215).
There may be circumstances in a bully’s home or family that can cause their actions, such as domestic violence, child abuse, and neglect. It’s important to consider the different types of bullies, including the narcissist, psychopath, attention-seeker, among others when deciding on treatment options to use alongside mandated programs for both bullies and their victims. However, some argue that these new state laws may violate students’ rights.
New Jersey’s Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights is currently the strictest law in effect, holding school administration accountable for any actions that violate a student’s First Amendment rights to freedom of speech, even if those actions occur off school grounds or involve technology such as the internet (Nash 1040-1041). However, because the definitions and standards of bullying outlined in state law are unclear, there have been updated doctrines put in place to specify certain limitations that fall under the First Amendment. Despite these efforts, it seems that fighting against bullying remains an uphill battle.
It appears that this right would be less likely to be violated if students were not punished, at a school official’s discretion, for actions off-campus related to verbal and online communications. There is also the argument that certain incidents of bullying violate students’ rights regarding religion, politics, and civil rights through speech. Shouldn’t they be able to express their views and opinions on these things? But what if they intentionally inflict fear or aggression towards others? This is another example of why the new laws are unsuccessful due to a lack of clarity.
The new laws now classify bullies as “criminals”. As the new definitions consider bullying as highly negative behavior, it is challenging to distinguish between those who deserve punishment and those who are being punished for minor conflicts. Students caught engaging in these behaviors face expulsion from school, suspension of internet access, or receiving poor marks on their student records that can impact college acceptances (Nash 2012).
It is important for schools to punish bullies when they violate policies under the supervision of school administrators. However, there needs to be a better way to discern the severity of a student’s actions and ensure that the punishment fits the crime. It should not be up to administrators alone to make this decision; bullying should be split up into subgroups based on types of bullying with appropriate punishments assigned accordingly. Additionally, implementing a bully prevention program in schools could increase reported cases of bullying as students gain a better understanding of what constitutes bullying.
According to a research study on prevention programs, it has been proven that this is not typically the case (Beran and Shapiro 704). Programs that teach students how to recognize bullying and step in positively help them gain the confidence to stop bullies before causing lasting harm to their victims. Despite the government’s efforts to solve the problem of school bullies, their laws for bully prevention are not helping students as anticipated.
Every parent fears the possibility of their child being targeted by a school bully, involved in a school shooting, or tormented enough to consider suicide. This issue has been brought into the spotlight by the media and public. However, laws with unclear standards and vague descriptions of bullying have not only required school districts to participate in costly programs but can also occasionally violate students’ rights.
The legislators are not addressing the specific nature of bullies or how to successfully prevent this behavior for long-term effect. Bullying has become a growing issue with the advancements in technology, such as Facebook, Twitter, and other social networking sites that give students more opportunities to bash their peers to a larger audience. Cyber-bullying has been one reason that has led to recent cases of suicide among bullying victims. We should absolutely respect our First Amendment rights; however, parents should be teaching their kids respect for others.
We have all heard of the golden rule, do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” but are we teaching these principles to our children? They need to learn the difference between healthy competition and intentionally harming their fellow students regardless of race, religion, interests, or sexual orientation.
Works Cited:
- Beran, Tanya and Bonnie Shapiro. “Evaluation of an Anti-Bullying Program: Student Reports of Knowledge and Confidence to Manage Bullying.” Canadian Journal of Education 28.4 (2005): 700-717. ProQuest. Web. 25 Mar. 2013.
- “Bullying Statistics.” PACER’s National Bully Prevention Center, 2012. Web. 6 April 2013.
- Cloud, John. “The Myths of Bullying.” Time 179.10 (2012):40-43.Academic Search Premier.EBSCO.Web.25 Mar.
- Donegan,Richard.”Bullying and Cyberbullying:History,Statistics,Law,PreventionandAnalysis.”TheElonJournalofUndergraduateResearchinCommunications3.1(Spring2012):33-42.Web6April2013.
< li>Field,Tim.BullyinSight:HowtoPredictResistChallenge,andCombatWorkplaceBullying.NewYork:SuccessUnlimited1996
Goldman, Carrie. Bullied: What Every Parent, Teacher, and Kid Needs to Know about Ending the Cycle of Fear. New York: Harper-Collins Publishers, 2012. Holt, Thomas J., et al. “Bullying Victimization and Adolescent Mental Health: General and Typological Effects across Sex.” Journal of Criminal Justice 41.1 (2013): 53-59.
Kalahar, Dean. “Anti-Bullying Campaign is just ‘Hate Crime’ Legislation for Kids.” EducationNews.org. EducationNews, 2010.
Nash, Lindsay. New Jersey’s Anti-Bullying Fix: A Solution or the Creation of an Even Greater First Amendment Problem?” Brigham Young University Law Review 2012.3 (2012): 1039-1070.
Ross, Scott W., and Robert H. Horner. “Bully Prevention in Positive Behavior Support.” Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 42.4 (Winter 2009):747-59.
Terry, Troy M.“Blocking the Bullies: Has South Carolina’s Safe School Climate Act made Public Schools Safer?” The Clearing House83(3) (2010):96-100.
