iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Janice Harper

GET UPDATES FROM Janice Harper

What's Wrong with the 'Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights'

Posted: 09/02/11 01:17 PM ET

Today marks a new day for bullies in New Jersey, who have been perversely granted greater power under the "Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights," a state law that took effect Sept. 1 criminalizing "bullying" and mandating that teachers and school administrators report all "bullies" to the police.

Under the new law, all public schools in New Jersey must develop comprehensive anti-bullying policies in accordance with 18 pages of "required components." Among these components, schools must appoint an anti-bullying specialist to investigate complaints, each district must have an anti-bullying coordinator who must adhere to strict deadlines for reporting complaints, and annual "school reports" of such incidents must be posted online. Teachers who are aware of conflicts with students -- including incidents that take place off school property and after school hours -- must report the incidents. Intervening to deal the with issue discreetly is prohibited, and students who bring any concern about bullying behavior to their teacher's attention put their own teachers at professional risk, because educators who fail to comply with the reporting requirements may lose their licenses.

There has been a storm of protest over the obvious flaws in such a law, such as removing parents and even the students themselves from resolving the conflicts, placing even greater burdens on our teachers and law enforcement and not providing them the resources to comply, criminalizing normal (albeit inappropriate and cruel) behavior among children, and giving ever more powers to the government. But there are also some very disturbing elements to the bill that may well empower bullies, and legitimate new forms of exclusion and social aggression by way of dehumanizing people with labels, and glossing varying forms of social aggression as a singular practice.

"The whole push is to incorporate the anti-bullying process into the culture," Lucila Hernandez, a school psychologist in New Jersey was quoted in The New York Times Aug. 31, 2011. "We're empowering children to use the term 'bullying' and to speak up for themselves and for others."

Yet the power children have been given is to send seemingly anonymous text messages, emails and tips to the police through a special CrimeStoppers hotline. What better tool to harass a target than to have a few students make "anonymous" reports accusing someone of "bullying"? Once the label has been made, the onus of proving innocence otherwise is on the one labeled "bully," and any resistance to group aggression can be perceived as "bullying," while the aggressors reach a "consensus" that their own aggression -- and shunning -- of the target is merely defensive behavior. More commonly, children can be easily pressured into viewing simple conflicts as bullying and making "anonymous" reports -- and once made, find it very difficult to rescind and settle the conflict informally, thereby increasing the chance that the original report will become increasingly embellished to justify having made it in the first place.

More importantly, to anyone who does make a legitimate report to the police in the belief that they are acting anonymously, they will be in for a surprise when they discover that once a conflict reaches the judicial system, whether through criminal or civil procedures, the laws of discovery kick in, compelling authorities to reveal the identities of all witnesses. Even when such identities are not known, the reports themselves will be turned over to the person charged with bullying, and the identities of participants can readily be determined -- or tragically mistaken. Such scenarios set the stage for escalating aggression through subsequent retaliation.

The situation is ripe for escalating the aggression against targeted individuals -- whose emotional vulnerability when targeted is easily misperceived, exploited and recast as hostile the more "investigations" ensue under this new law. Those who are charged with launching and conducting these investigations -- teachers, school administrators and social workers who are already overwhelmed at work -- may well resent being compelled to document and investigate such unsettling and murky conflicts. Consequently, they may focus their investigation on the most vulnerable person -- the "tattletale," the "whistleblower," the target whose "difference" marked them for social aggression or "bullying" in the first place.

Finally, the Bill also provides a prime opportunity for teachers and school administrators themselves to be labeled "soft on bullying" by aggressive co-workers and supervisors. Collective aggression in the workplace is called mobbing, and it is particularly rampant in professions where it is difficult to simply fire a person or they are unlikely to resign easily -- such as professions where there is a union, few professional opportunities elsewhere, or a tenure system, including teaching. In these cases, when a person in a position of leadership or influence targets someone for elimination, accusation of any nature is powerful and effective, regardless of the facts.

Aggressive co-workers or school administrators can use anti-bullying policies as a mechanism for excluding and eliminating another teacher by claiming they are soft on bullying. It is only a matter of time before any teacher who witnesses numerous acts of social aggression among students every day becomes vulnerable to being accused of not making a report when one was called for, of being tolerant of a student labeled a bully, of trying to resolve a social conflict rather than formalize it with a criminal complaint. In other words, bullying doesn't stop at graduation; it just becomes more sophisticated and damaging as it moves from the schoolyard to the workplace.

To those who would charge that I am soft on bullying myself, let me be clear. I well know the pain and torment that targets of bullying suffer. As a child I was tormented mercilessly, while teachers and administrators did nothing. Decades later, as a well-respected university professor I became the target of a particularly vicious mobbing launched by two administrators who adroitly encouraged a campaign of false rumors and damaging innuendos against me until my own career was irreparably damaged. And when my daughter was targeted for bullying at her new school, not only did I witness the devastating impact it had on her, but I saw how it transformed her from a joyful and popular girl who loved going to school to an anguished child who begged to stay home.

What marked this incident from my own experiences as a target was that her teachers and principal stepped in to nip the bullying in the bud, and did so in a manner that did not demonize the "bullies." Within days of this informal intervention -- which would be impossible under the New Jersey law -- not only did the bullying of my daughter stop and her love for school return, but the "bullies" became her well-liked classmates by year's end. Had the "bullies" -- who may have been targets of abuse in their own homes or been targets of school bullying themselves -- been criminalized, what might their futures have been? And what further aggression might my daughter have faced for objecting to the treatment?

Labeling, dehumanizing, and expelling people are forms of aggression and belong on a continuum of violence that grows ever greater the more they are sanctioned by authorities. Current anti-bullying rhetoric is among the most exclusionary, dehumanizing and aggressive trends developing in American society today and one I fear does more to embolden "bullying" than to remedy it. To better equip schools, parents, and children to address bullying behaviors, we might begin by analyzing bullying as a group phenomenon, and give greater power to all participants to defuse social conflicts informally, compassionately and independently. When it comes to dealing with "bullies," one size does not fit all.

 

Follow Janice Harper on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Janice_Harper

 
 
  • Comments
  • 13
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Geral Sosbee
06:23 PM on 09/11/2011
The reality of 'bullyism', a national trait


THE usa HAS BECOME OVER THE CENTURIES A NATION OF BULLIES,ASSASSINS AND HOMICIDAL SOCIOPATHS.
Until the parents accept/recognize this fact, the children will continue to imitate the national character of this God forsaken country.

Suggestion: prepare for violence;endeavor to do none.

A few links in evidence:
http://sosbeevfbi.ning.com/profiles/blogs/fbi-homicidal-sociopath-orders-kill-yourself-geral-sosbee


http://www.sosbeevfbi.com/hatemailpartsix.html

http://www.sosbeevfbi.com/part4-worldinabo.html

http://www.sosbeevfbi.com/geralsosbeearmyf.html
10:03 PM on 09/04/2011
Yes, we need more awareness and training to deal with "bullies." But reporting to the police? Removing parents from the resolution of conflicts? I think not. The last thing teachers and administrators need heaped upon them is around-the-clock anti-student reporting requirements. How about more compassion and tolerance training for use in the classroom? The actions of a single person can make or break a child, whether the victim or the "bully."
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
francisco cortes
02:18 AM on 09/06/2011
You lnow what's depressing and sucks big time is that teachers bully too, teachers bully teachers and principals bully teachers and students bully teachers and teachers bully students and principals, schools are a mess of bullying, only those who are popular do not get to be bully, i am a teacher and i have being bullied by other teachers.
01:08 PM on 09/03/2011
New Jersey also has a law that anyone can be convicted of DUI on just a person's word yet there hasn't been a rush to falsely accuse people. The schools are responsible for the physical and psychological welfare of its students and failed to do it; now legistlation must force them. Bullies are not victims of their self esteems; they're nasty people that derive their power from the silence of others. Silence is in fact an action that used in the face of corruption and/or physical and psychological harm lends consent to the action and empowerment; So you have to go after the ones who would remain silent. Children are adults in the making and most bullies don't grow out of it, they become more refined and insidious. They're found in every area of life. And why should anyone spend more than four years of their lives in fear and misery in school?

Decency required that this issue was properly handled by teachers and administrators to begin with. But they refused. Now they must be forced to deal with it. It need not be a burden to the teachers and administrators. They just need to acquire an atmosphere and attitude that bullying will not be tolerated., cease blaming the victim, cease catering to the bullies who are jocks, cheerleaders, those that get the highest grades and those who have the power withing their social spheres.
12:41 PM on 09/03/2011
The bill of rights approach seems to assume that the bullying reflects solely a flaw within the individual: some people are just bad. Their behavior reflects individual intentions to do bad things to other people. An alternative view is that the problem lies between people. It's relationships that are flawed. From that point of view, the most effective action is for everyone in a community to promote and insist upon respect and civility in all their encounters. Everyone has a responsibility to contribute to the positive qualities of the community.
www.workengagement.com/crew
photo
dmgoss
Sapere Aude
08:00 PM on 09/02/2011
My first reaction to another story regarding this law was to compare its obvious structural faults, and the potential for harm, to how many American school districts have instituted draconian anti-student policies, post-Columibine. Students suspended, or expelled, for childish behavior, now viewed as criminals and commensurately punishable under a new legal manner of treating bad behavior that has as little in common with school shootings as carrying analgesic medicines to a school that bans all "drugs" from its grounds, or that end up in cases of actionable abuse on the part of school authorities who remove and handcuff small children for acting out in class.

How are we then to trust the same structure with responsible implementation of what you correctly point out is a law that seeks to treat bullies punitively, while seeming to casually forget they are as much children as their victims, and remain vulnerable to the potential excesses of those tasked with their punishment. Perhaps I'm being too much of a liberal humanist, but if implementation of this law criminalizes children as casually as other aspects of the new school discipline, the bullies here will be the adults who forget the targets of their enforcement are as much children as those bullied, who might already be experiencing similar abuse in their own homes, who may view this attack on their persons as familiar adult behavior, and a self-fulfillling prophecy about what kind of person the world says they are.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
francisco cortes
07:17 PM on 09/02/2011
“The fight against bullying will never end but it must happen, is like the fight against disease but disease will never go away. Every social species in the biosphere bully in the name of the competitio­­n for the resource of the ecosystem and pecking order competitio­­n. Sorry to say when you fight against bullying you are fighting against aproximate­­ly 450 million years of biological evolution hardwire in the reptilian brain of every human being including myself, the only thing that can stop bullying is call the frontal lobe of the neurocorte­­x, still humans have a hard time controllin­­g animal instincts enough to avoid bullying.”

Janice Harper i have being under mobbing yes mobbing, but to fight against mobbing is like fighting against the hiv virus, i want mobbing to go away but mother nature will not allow it!
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Janice Harper
07:42 PM on 09/02/2011
It is true that collective aggression is innate to our species, and I'd like to see the anti-bullying discourse give more attention to the biocultural factors involved in bullying and mobbing. But all cultures create social rules to control our innate impulses, and we certainly need to control bullying behaviors. I fear, however, that the current trends to use dehumanizing labels and zero tolerance policies will do little to stop the practice, and much to increase the damaging effects of social aggression.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
francisco cortes
10:18 PM on 09/02/2011
That's because i believed those who are fighting bullying do not understand and accept bullying is in their nature as well. There's a level of narcissism of those who fight bullying, that will promote bullying in the end instead of eliminating it. We are simply dangerous beings anyone of us with too much power will just corrupt and bully others, part of fighting bullying should be fighting against the imbalance of power that allow bullying to happen in a social system x or y.
01:41 PM on 09/02/2011
3 points, one your own... Bullies and bullying techniques are not limited to aggression, they can be more of an exclusionary basis, not letting you sit at their table, play their game, etc. Secondly, you're right, smarter bullies may reverse the bully "charge" and claim that student was bullying the group, and may use somewhat factual statements to back it up, "this teacher saw him come over and sit by us, that's when he did xyz." So now this poor student ends up having to defend himself or herself against the lies of a few, but now also has a teacher, who's been named by the actual bullies that may inadvertently back up the story of the real bullies. Lastly, kids will be kids, yes it is a tired cliche, but even the most morally upstanding kids will still behave from time to time like kids.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Janice Harper
01:52 PM on 09/02/2011
You hit on an important point regarding the role of exclusion. I think that the role of shunning in bullying and mobbing is one of the most devastating, and the least discussed. Whether the shunning is among children at school, in the workplace, or by family or religious organization, it is a powerful form of aggression and manipulation (of others, who fear the same will happen to them if they do not join in). Yet ironically, because it is a "non-action," it is among the most difficult to address or reverse through either the courts or non-judicial investigations.
05:44 PM on 09/02/2011
Indeed, and how exactly would you measure or enforce efforts against this type. In many schools, certain groups, sports teams, etc are very exclusionary of each other, while not condemning anyone, they want to protect their "circle." But on the flip side, isn't this the prerogative of any student or group, to decide who their friends are? There are just too many questions and issues that will never be resolved with these kinds of laws.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
inmyhumbleopinion
Vote third party.
12:33 PM on 09/02/2011
You make some great points and it does sound as if the new law in NJ may have unintended consequences.

That said, I see this no differently than the law that requires teachers or doctors to report suspected child abuse to the authorities. Parents have been wrongly accused of harming their own kids, but more kids who actually were abused have been helped by this rule. In the scheme of things, more people will be helped by this anti-bullying legislation than hurt by it. But of course, only time will tell.

There is no perfect system of justice. I see this as a step in the right direction and empowers students to report problems to responsible adults.