Massachusetts, it is time for the anti-bullying law to be implemented and a writer in the Boston Globe hopes its implementation does not suffer the same fate as an anti-hazing law that was enacted after the 1984 death of a college student who died of acute alcohol poisoning after an enforced hazing:
Only three weeks after the deadline for schools to file anti-bullying plans with the state, a cautionary lesson has come out of the state auditor’s office. We have had an anti-hazing law for 25 years, but an audit found that state monitoring of school compliance with the law had been nearly nonexistent.
Parallel to how the anti-bullying law emerged from the suicides of Phoebe Prince and Carl Joseph Walker-Hoover, the anti-hazing law was inspired by the 1984 death of a college student who died of acute alcohol poisoning after a forced gorging. When Governor Michael Dukakis signed the law establishing criminal penalties, he said, “This is the kind of conduct we’re not going to tolerate in this state.’’
A quarter century later, no one knows just what is tolerated. Despite heightened national awareness of bullying, three quarters of incidents likely still go unreported, according to researchers at the University of New Hampshire. A 2008 University of Maine study determined that 55 percent of college students involved with teams, clubs, bands, and other campus organizations experience hazing. Nearly half of the respondents came to college having experienced hazing in high school. Despite the refreshing suspensions for high school hazing last fall in Needham and Agawam, flushing out bullying and hazing remains exceedingly difficult amidst a youth’s desire to belong, the denial of many parents that their kids haze, and skittish administrators who want to confront neither parents nor bad publicity.
The law in Massachusetts has been receiving national publicity while evoking strong feelings in different directions. Many applaud the Massachusetts law and others like it for making it clear to everyone that bullying will not be tolerated. Others worry that the law may set-up "zero-tolerance" policies that don't cover complex situations but which lead to over-reactions in minor matters. The discussion is an important one, and applies not only to high schools, but carries over to the continued existence of bullying and hazing on college campuses, as noted by my recent blog for The American Mental Health Association.
William Van Ornum
Frankly, I believe these anti-bullying laws are just an attempt of homosexual advocates to promote the teaching of homosexual behavior in public schools. To them, all behavior, especially sexual behavior, must be accepted. But religious behavior can never be tolerated.
We can't protect every child who is mentally ill-equipped to handle adversity; there will always be someone who looks at you the wrong way, says the wrong thing, are thinks the wrong thing. When is the suicide itself irrational?
My parents helped me deal with the various instances of "bullying" that I suffered over the years: "Sticks and stones many break my bones...." Physical bullying is already prohibited in all school policies, and physical violence against anyone is covered by existing state statutes.
What "complex situations" could those possibly be?
I think the law sounds like a good idea. The arguments against it remind me of the arguments against The Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Bill. The merit of the idea that we need to preserve the right to torment others just escapes me.
Is that OK or is it just "kid stuff?"
The fact that there can be disagreement about attempts to quash bullying on school campuses sickens me.
http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-05-27/news/17202387_1_gay-student-school-board-anti-bully
No special mention of racial bullying or religious bullying, but homosexual bullying gets special mention. No opt-out for parents permitted.
Perhaps I take too ideological an approach to such matters, but whenever I see legislation being passed on matters where there has previously seemed to be no need of legislation, I look for the motives. So what's changed that we suddenly need anti-bullying legislation? Is there more bullying? Have children become more sensitive? Are parents not preparing their children for adversity as well as they have in years past? Are homosexual advocates, emboldened by approval of same-sex marriage, attempting to indoctrinate young children into accepting thier lifestyle and snuffing out religious opposition?
And given that something has changed, is legislation the way to address it, or is there some other less intrusive means for accomplishing the claimed issue?
Secularlists have already removed Christmas from the schools, notwithstanding any real opposition to it and any harm caused by it. Perhaps if Christmas and its message of peace on earth, good will to men were still allowed in schools, bullying would be less of an issue.
But we also need to acknowledge that identity politics isn't the only new reality: the internet has made instantaneous, widespread, and irrevocable communication possible in a new way, and cell phones enable constant and direct communication. Many extreme cases of bullying have heavily involved such new technologies - ensuring that such taunting follows a victim wherever he or she goes. Moreover, even children and teenagers who don't use the internet, or whose internet use is monitored by their parents, are still affected by this: there have been several cases of bullies creating fake accounts using the name of a classmate. These are all fairly significant new developments that have nothing to do with the bogeyman of "homosexual activists."
Furthermore, I think that the absence of state monitoring does not mean colleges failed to address the issues of hazing and underage drinking in student orientations or that colleges did not punish students caught engaging in these activities. I would assume that colleges will address the issue of bullying, as they do hazing and underage drinking, more because of parental (bill payer) concern than because of legislation.
High school, middle school, and elementary school are different matter. In my opinion, when education is compulsory, the student has a right to expect protection from bullying. Therefore, I think this law is necessary and that the state will be vigilant that it is followed lest it become subject to lawsuits. More than likely, though, unenlightened enforcement will at times occur because some teachers and some administrators are primarily bureaucrats.
I am now off sabbatical and am teaching four full-time classes. I want to do right by my students, so my participation in the blog discussion may evolve or take a different form. So here's a few thoughts in response nto everyone:
I think Katrina brings up an interesting point concerning hazing on large university campuses.
Are we glosing over, minimizing, or denying what is going on? I think this deserves to remain as an open question, perhaps in another blog.
I have a question that perhaps Jim or others could address: is there gay-on-gay bullying? We have, do, and will devote attention in this magazine to straight-on-gay bullying-but what about gays who are bullied by other gays? is this an overlooked topic? In particular, are gays ever forced into unsafe sex by other gays?
Finally, for want of a better word, there seems to me to be an entire spectrum of what, for a better word, I will call "asexual bullying." This can occur at all ages, and be directed toward people of any sexual orientation or practice. It happens across the lifepsan, not just in schools. More to be written on this one, both here and at American Mental Health Foundation, where we are devoting an entire section of the blog to bullying, and have done so for the past ten months: http://www.americanmentalhealthfoundation.org/blog.php?c=15
I agree with Michelle that there is much to do to bring in a world without bullying.
Best to all and thanks to all respondents, amdg, bill
My children who were in special ed and some mainstream classes were both bullied in middle school and high school. It was so bad for my son that he refused to use the rest rooms at school. At that time, school personnel seemed helpless or powerless to do anything about it. As a parent it was up to me to teach them that the bullying was WRONG and did not reflect on their worth but was a failing in the bully. So when I read about the Mass. law I'll be interested to follow how effective the law is in preventing bullying or will it be another exercise in schools writing procedures they won't follow. More paperwork and beauracracy. One hopeful comment was by a deputy auditor who said that ideally if the state was getting the required reports they could review a handful and "begin a process of seeing what works and what doesn't work". At least the state would have something to go on and other states could learn from Mass.
Another area for analysis is the bullying that occurs within ethnic/racial groups. I'm thinking particularly of African-American and Hispanic youth who are bright and ambitious and are bullied by their peers because they are serious about their studies.
Bill, I bet your students will give you lots of pertinent information as they probably have seen or experienced bullying themselves. It is great to read their comments on the blogs. Best wishes in the classroom!
The legislature in my state of New Mexico determined that all students must take and pass a New Mexico history course. All legislatures set up and fund departments of education.? ? ??Public schools get a lot of their funding from the state government, or through the state government, in the case of federal funding. They set the graduation requirements.
Although I do believe bullying is a pretty clear cut issue and it is not difficult to tell when someone has crossed the line, I think part of the problem with the anti-hazing law is that it paints with a broad brush. Many schools may have been remiss in cracking down on dangerous hazing, but there are some cases where a group's actions qualify as hazing, without the negative effects. I know some teams and groups on Marist's campus have the new members do activities like scavenger hunts together. When done with the right intentions and when the participants know that they are free to decide whether they want to be involved, I see these types of activities as bonding rather than hazing. They are simply a way for teammates to get closer to each other in a safe activity. Of course there are plenty of instances when hazing is not as innocent and those activities should be penalized, but we have to be careful not to take the definition of hazing too far.
As ABC reporters wrote in their article on a cyberbullying related suicide in 2010, "The schoolyard bullies beat you up and then go home," she said. "The cyberbullies beat you up at home, at grandma's house, whereever you're connected to technology (http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Parenting/girls-teen-suicide-calls-attention-cyberbullying/story?id=9685026)."
While it is great to emphasize to students that bullying is not tolerated at school, there must be a general emphasis on respect and kindness throughout all aspects of their lives. Bullying does not only occur in school, and something needs to be done to eliminate every aspect of bullying, before more young children tragically commit suicide.