| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="SecondPaper" |
|---|
| | | Sticks & Stones
-- By AshleySimpson - 17 Apr 2010 | |
<
< | Three months ago, Phoebe Prince committed suicide. She was romantically involved with two boys at her school and as a result, other students targeted her through name-calling and threats of violence. She was found dead after a particularly harsh day on January 14, 2010. Prince's suicide demonstrates the recent transformation of bullying. Though I am hesitant to agree with the claim that children have become meaner, the technology advancement of cell phones, instant messaging and social networking sites have provided adolescents with larger audiences, thereby giving their taunts a more severe bite. Now instead of privately excluding peers from cliques and the customary face-to-face disparagements, students can exclude others from facebook friendship or maliciously send indecent photos of each other to large groups of people. | >
> | Eight months ago, Phoebe Prince emigrated from Ireland to the United States. Five months later, she committed suicide. Initially, it appeared as though Prince was well-adapted to her new surroundings - she was well liked by he classmates and (briefly) romantically involved with a senior on the football team. However, her romantic success had inspired a backlash and other students (among them a girl who had also dated the football player) targeted her through name-calling and threats of violence. The bullying escalated until Prince was found dead after a particularly harsh day on January 14, 2010. The media latched onto Prince's suicide as an example of the recent transformation of bullying. The proliferation of cell phones, instant messaging, and social networking sites has provided adolescents with larger audiences, thereby giving their taunts a more severe bite. Now instead of privately excluding peers from cliques and the customary face-to-face disparagements, students can post their disparagements for the whole world to see, and to pile on to. And for those bullied, the comments never disappear - they just become archived. | | | | |
<
< | Does her suicide demonstrate the trend? From what I've been reading, the social networking aspect of the bullying wasn't primary - the face to face bullying was a large part of it. The triggering incident, if one can be found, was supposed to be the students pelting her with a can as they drove away. But I do agree that the facebook bullying acts as a massive aggravating factor - the larger audience, coupled with the permanence of it all. When someone orally insults you, the words dissipate - facebook taunts don't just linger, they multiply across profiles. I'm also not sure if the indecent photos is something you want to mention - I'm not fully informed about bullying, but to me this seems like a separate issue and one with a lot of stuff attached to it that I don't think you want to implicate. Something else to consider is the anonymity of the internet, or more accurately, the illusory anonymity. A few years ago, Brown had a campaign to convince college aged kids that yes, facebook was real, permanent, and read by the outside world - now that facebook is being used by babies (I know a couple that created a page for their month old infant), that message needs to get taught to a younger and younger audience.
I was trying to use a real world example to function as a prompt or a jumping point into my thesis; an attention grabber of sorts. If you think it is ineffective, I will think about whether or not I can adjust the example to make it more appropriate or just delete it in general. I meant through its reference to show that it demonstrates that this is an issue that needs to be adequately addressed. I was actually really interested in cyber bullying so maybe I will take this paper in that direction instead.
Prince's unfortunate suicide was not the typical reaction, however bullying is still a problem that demands greater attention. The recent prosecution of 6 of Prince's classmates demonstrates one approach to assuaging the bullying problem. That response is to bring law enforcement into schools to further encourage criminalization of bullying as a means of prevention. Though I acknowledge that criminalizing certain offenses can deter some offensive behavior, I do not think it is appropriate with regards to the pairing of school aged children and the specific offense of bullying.
From what I've read, and what you mention below, the prosecutor is charging the students with Assault with a Deadly Weapon (for throwing the can), Stalking, Harassment, Statutory Rape, Violation of Civil Rights (?), and even Assault and Battery for beating up a girl who gave a TV interview about the bullying. Instead, your beef is with those pushing to create Bullying Statutes, which some states already have. Or, you might want to say that it is unfair to press the bullying tactics of the students into these (Stalking, Harassment) adult crimes? | >
> | Prince's unfortunate suicide was not the typical reaction, however bullying is still a problem that demands greater attention. Unfortunately, like many issues, the attention comes in fits and starts as a particularly sad story ignites a media firestorm. The recent prosecution of 6 of Prince's classmates demonstrates one approach to remedying the bullying problem, bringing law enforcement and criminal sanctions into schools. Though criminalizing certain offenses can deter some behavior, the logic of general deterrence is stretched too thin when applied to school aged children and the specific offense of bullying. | | | Criminalization will not Deter the Bullying | |
<
< | The desire to deter bullies through criminal prosecution is misguided. There is no clear definition of bullying so students may not know whether or not they are bullies. Even the students in Prince's scenario most likely felt a bit justified in their mistreatment of the decedent. Those students, who were charged with harassment and stalking (among other charges), saw Prince as a girl who maliciously tried to steal their boyfriends. Some students might restrict the definition of bullying to physical attacks whiles others might describe it as a combination of taunts and physical attacks. Another group of adolescents might believe that bullying can describe purely psychological harassment. On top of those distinctions is the question of whether bullying can only happen on school grounds or if it can also occur via the Internet. Until there is a solid description of the offense, it cannot be deterred because the offenders do not know that they are offending.
If you are strongly committed to this paragraph, let me know because I feel like it should go. For one, this isn't a fatal problem because bullying can be defined. But, as we discussed in person, a similar claim could be made for a lot of crimes - particularly harassment and stalking. Also, I think you are taking a difficult position in being in favor of some playground cruelty - the claim that the bullies feel justified because Prince "stole their men" isn't a very sympathetic claim and it seems irrelevant. | >
> | The desire to deter bullies through criminal prosecution is misguided. As an initial matter, the reaction of the media seems necessary for charges to be pressed - therefore a student wouldn't have to fear criminal sanction unless the subject of his taunting actually commits suicide. But more pressingly, "bullying" is a relatively amorphous term. It implies some coordinated assault, but does it reach purely verbal incidents? Does bullying require an actual physical threat? Some states have created a specific criminal offense of bullying in order to expressly delineate the conduct to be deterred. | | | | |
<
< | Furthermore, students who are bullied are very unlikely to tell anyone about their torment for fear of being deemed weak by their peers. For this reason, it is difficult for school officials and parents to evaluate the severity of the bullying until tragedies like Prince's occur. Assuming that children are capable of the cost-benefit analysis that the deterrence theory requires, there is no incentive for them to change their behavior as the likelihood of being criminally punished is low. The punishment might be greater than the satisfaction they retain from bullying however if they are unlikely to be caught, that analysis has no meaning.
I'm not sure that would remain true if there were legal sanctions involved - those picked on would love the opportunity to make the bullies suffer for their cruelty. Also, I think the goal in criminalizing bullying isn't the criminal sanctions but the attitude shift. It forces schools to focus even more on the issue and brings the support of the law to those bullied - they aren't just whiny and wimpy, they're the victims of a crime. Prince's situation had the aggravating factor that she was new to not just the town, but the country - and even her bullying was known by the administration (supposedly, prior to her enrollment, they had been warned that she was "susceptible to bullying") . The problem then is either willful blindness or inaction. | >
> | Even if criminalizing "bullying" removes the stigma from being bullied (from "sissy" to "crime victim"), students are still unlikely to report the incidents. Bullying is primarily about isolating the victim from the social group, and while calling down authority might make the bullying less overt, it often ends up only widening the social gulf. For this reason, it is difficult for school officials and parents to evaluate the severity of the bullying until tragedies like Prince's occur. Assuming that children are capable of the cost-benefit analysis that the deterrence theory requires, there is no incentive for them to change their behavior as the likelihood of being criminally punished is low. The punishment might be greater than the satisfaction they retain from bullying however if they are unlikely to be caught, that analysis has no meaning. | | | Steps to a Solution | |
<
< | Punishing bullies with jail time may serve the retributionist purpose of providing vindication to the family and friends of students harmed by such behavior but it will not effectively prevent the worsening problem. Rather than allow politicians to use bullying as fodder for their campaign speeches, the government should focus on prevention of those initial harms. The first step towards a solution should be to specifically define bullying. I do not believe that all forms of bullying should be banned in school settings. To a certain extent, the non-physical meanness experienced in school prepares students for future rejection in life and give them the ability to discern how to find self-worth beyond the words and treatment of others. However, the level of torment over that allowable threshold experienced by Prince and students across the country need to be addressed and limited. The final concrete definition of bullying should take into consideration the learning experience that a certain amount of bullying supplies.
Is a rigid definition really crucial? My experience with schools is, granted, limited to well-funded suburban schools with relatively low student-teacher rations (25-1 is low). However, most of the teachers I know view bullying the same way Justice Stewart views pornography (tee hee) - they know it when they see it. Also, as we discussed, I think it would help your argument to start off with your definition of bullying (which you don't approve of) and then create a separate word to cover the 'bullying' you do approve of - I have no idea what that word would be at this point, any ideas? | >
> | Rather than allow politicians to use bullying as fodder for their campaign speeches, the government should focus on prevention of those initial harms. The first step towards a solution should be to specifically define proscribed "bullying". To a certain extent, the non-physical "meanness" experienced in school prepares students for future rejection in life and provides an impetus for finding self-worth internally - beyond the words and treatment of others. However, the level of torment experienced by Prince and students across the country need to be addressed and limited. The final concrete definition of bullying should take into consideration the learning experience that a certain amount of adversity supplies. | | | | |
<
< | It also may be prudent to define bullying through its less dramatic effects. Bullied children often try to avoid school in order to avoid their harasser. They do so by pretending to be sick in order to stay home or through frequent visits to the school nurse's office. School policy could be geared towards carefully monitoring students who frequently ask to see the nurse for not merely serious medical problems but also for overly abusive interpersonal relationships with their classmates. This is somewhat similar to the approach taken by Professor Dan Olweus's bullying prevention program. Olweus uses a community approach to dealing with bullying in schools. The program calls for teachers, administrators, cafeteria personal and parents to join students in the attempt to curb bullying on campus through both vigilance for bullying and through education of both students and adults about how determine what kinds of behavior are unacceptable. Though I think Professor Olweus’ definition of bullying is overly inclusive, his methods have found success. | >
> | It also may be prudent to diagnose bullying through its less dramatic effects. Bullied children often try to avoid school in order to avoid their harasser. They do so by pretending to be sick in order to stay home or through frequent visits to the school nurse's office. School policy could be geared towards carefully monitoring students who frequently ask to see the nurse, epidemiological evidence of overly abusive interpersonal relationships with their classmates. This is somewhat similar to the approach taken by Professor Dan Olweus's bullying prevention program. Olweus uses a community approach to dealing with bullying in schools. The program calls for teachers, administrators, cafeteria personnel, janitors, and parents to join students in the attempt to curb bullying on campus. The program attempts to treat the symptoms through vigilant attention, and the cause through education of both students and adults concerning what kinds of behavior are unacceptable. Though Professor Olweus’ definition of bullying may be overly inclusive, his methods have found success. | | | | |
<
< | Adults may be better able to deal with physical bullying, but verbal and social bullying are easier to detect by the students. Bullying works to isolate its target. It makes the mark feel less self-worth than the greater group. Programs that help students to identify bullying and encourages them to intervene on behalf of their classmates mitigates the abuse and negates the isolation felt by the victim. A private school in Northern New Jersey has successfully put this principle into action by instituting a "safe room" connected to the guidance department where students are not allowed to bully one another. If a student is going through a problem, they can find support from their classmates or administers if they choose. Implementing policies like this are steps towards alleviating the effects of bullying in school settings.
This private school is very interesting - do you have any reading on it? I just wonder if this "safe room" really works, or if it's really just a way to physically isolate those picked on. In other words, is it a room where bully and nerd interact as friends? Or is it the Krelboyne classroom from Malcom in the Middle (i.e. a room where no one is socially cruel because no one is socially popular)? | >
> | Adults may be better situated to respond to physical bullying, but students are more capable of detecting verbal and social bullying. Bullying works to isolate its target. It makes the mark feel less self-worth because of his inability to integrate with the greater group. Programs that help students to identify bullying and encourage them to intervene on behalf of their classmates mitigate the abuse and negate the isolation felt by the victim. A private school in Northern New Jersey has successfully put this principle into action by instituting a "safe room" connected to the guidance department where students are not allowed to bully one another. If a student is going through a problem, they can find support from their classmates or administers. Implementing policies like this is a step towards alleviating the effects of bullying in school settings. | | | Conclusion
Bullying became more severe over the years but criminalizing the actors will not dull its power. Lawmakers need to direct their attention to schools in order to have real preventative impact to save the potential Phoebe Princes. | |
<
< | In what specific way are you thinking of the legislature affecting the schools? Some sort of funding withholding scheme where if a school doesn't satisfy their anti-bully crusade they lose money? Or are you considering a legislative incentive for private suits - so that more bullied students can hold their school civilly responsible? | >
> |
So here's what I've got. I'm still not fully comfortable with the first paragraph after "Criminalization will not Deter bullying" - it feels like we're attacking the short term problems of the approach, when most would agree it has a long horizon. I left the paragraph in, but in all honesty I feel you should cut it - maybe add a short line about the difficulties in determining what is "over the line" into the next paragraph. Also, I made a few small line edits I think I should explain - I removed your reference to retribution because, from what I've read, most parents don't feel vindicated when the bully instrumental to their child's suicide is arrested - they seem to have the same problem you have, that this is just a show without impact. Also, I inserted janitors into your list of school staff that help out students - mostly because the janitors were almost always my favorite adults in the schools. I liked the stark nature of your opening, but I tried to humanize the incident a bit more - keep in the shock, but with more context for people who aren't familiar. Your analysis of the Cost-Benefit analysis can be left in if you believe it, but I don't think you do and I don't see a need to lie if you don't. From our conversation, it seemed like your bigger issue isn't that bullies need to realize that the fun isn't worth the (attenuated and unlikely) harm to themselves but rather that their actions have consequences and their pleasure isn't worth the harm directly inflicted on the other student. Oh yeah, and I'm a fan of the Oxford comma, so I used it. "To my parents, Ayn Rand and God."
I tried to provide you with a good platform for whichever direction you decide you're most interested in - media response, cyber bullying, etc. I didn't find out more about the NJ school, but if you're attempting to propose it as an effective solution, I think you need some more analysis of it. Even just a line about how it seems to be working. I think your analysis of bullying as isolation was a brilliant move - it really helps show why the highly individual focus of criminalization isn't going to be effective, and why it's necessary to have a "community approach". | | | | |
<
< | Ashley, I think you're writing about a very tricky area and that we should tread lightly - or firmly but with great care where we step. A lot of people do think that kids need a little adversity, a little bit of namecalling, in order to be "tough enough" for the real world. However, I think using the word "bullying" to describe that isn't going to resonate with people - bullying feels more coordinated, more continuous, more vicious than the acts you would allow. Also, I'm worried about using the Prince case here. It's an emerging case, one where we get fragmented facts and lots of grandstanding by politicians and interest groups. Perhaps the trajectory here would be more illustrative - it seems like every few years a "bullying incident" occurs (sometimes as extreme as Columbine, sometimes as individual as Prince) and this leads to a lot of legislative blustering, and a few weeks where every teacher gives a "bullying is bad, m'kay?" speech. The issue is what happens once the fervor dies down. | >
> | If you've got any other thoughts, let me know. This paper has a point, and that's something I can get into. | | | |
|