Federal Anti-Bullying Law

[Madeline]

The Safe Schools Improvement Act seems to be a massive federal initiative to curb bullying and harrasment in the public schools of all states. CNN's "Anderson Cooper" had a segment tonight about whether this bill "advances a gay agenda". The bill requires the schools to record and report incidents of bullying and harrasment (to who? for what purpose?) but also to "prevent and respond to incidents" of bullying and harrasment as well as report same to parents and set up a grievance procedure for same.

The bill defines bullying and harrasment as follows:

(12) BULLYING- The term ‘bullying’ means conduct that--
‘(A) adversely affects the ability of one or more students to participate in or benefit from the school’s educational programs or activities by placing the student (or students) in reasonable fear of physical harm; and
‘(B) includes conduct that is based on--
‘(i) a student’s actual or perceived--
‘(I) race;
‘(II) color;
‘(III) national origin;
‘(IV) sex;
‘(V) disability;
‘(VI) sexual orientation;
‘(VII) gender identity; or
‘(VIII) religion;
‘(ii) any other distinguishing characteristics that may be defined by a State or local educational agency; or
‘(iii) association with a person or group with one or more of the actual or perceived characteristics listed in clause (i) or (ii).
‘(13) HARASSMENT- The term ‘harassment’ means conduct that--
‘(A) adversely affects the ability of one or more students to participate in or benefit from the school’s educational programs or activities because the conduct, as reasonably perceived by the student (or students), is so severe, persistent, or pervasive; and
‘(B) includes conduct that is based on--
‘(i) a student’s actual or perceived--
‘(I) race;
‘(II) color;
‘(III) national origin;
‘(IV) sex;
‘(V) disability;
‘(VI) sexual orientation;
‘(VII) gender identity; or
‘(VIII) religion;
‘(ii) any other distinguishing characteristics that may be defined by a State or local educational agency; or
‘(iii) association with a person or group with one or more of the actual or perceived characteristics listed in clause (i) or (ii).
‘(14) VIOLENCE- The term ‘violence’ includes bullying and harassment.’.

The objection made by Focus On Family etc. seems to be that the bill will require schools to teach students about homosexuality in order to prevent any bullying etc. based on it.

I'm not sure exactly how such a complaint should be met. If a little kid comes from a home with two gay parents and gets teased because of it, the bill seems to require the school to put a stop to it...but how can they do this without using the words "gay" or "homosexual"? Much as it pains me to admit it, I think anti-gay folks might finally have themselves a legitimate issue here.

I also wonder why this needs to be a federal issue. Bullying is an emerging issue, shaped in part by technology advances. Can't we allow the states or even the counties to flounder around awhile before we draw up a uniform nationwide consensus on how best to respond?

The bill is in Committee now, and might never emerge -- but if you'd like to have an impact, this might be the best time to make your opinion known to your representative.

H.R. 2262: Safe Schools Improvement Act of 2009 (GovTrack.us)

 

[California Girl]

There is a huge difference between teaching children acceptance of others, (Note: I didn't say 'tolerance'... I dislike the word).... and 'advancing a gay agenda'.

 

[Madeline]

In theory there is, but in practice? How do you teach kindergartners not to tease a child from a home with gay parents while refraining from any explanation of homosexuality? I'll admit, I prefer kidlets be taught about sex (yes, gay sex too) at a young age and did so with my own...but at the time I knew this was a violently different POV and also taught my kidlet not to share what she knew with her friends.

The whole subject seem fraught with potential for error and abuse.

 

[California Girl]

In theory there is, but in practice? How do you teach kindergartners not to tease a child from a home with gay parents while refraining from any explanation of homosexuality? I'll admit, I prefer kidlets be taught about sex (yes, gay sex too) at a young age and did so with my own...but at the time I knew this was a violently different POV and also taught my kidlet not to share what she knew with her friends.

The whole subject seem fraught with potential for error and abuse.

Key words when dealing with kids and sex education - Age Appropriate. It is quite easy to teach very young children about different types of family (2 moms, 2 dads, step families, multiracial or whatever) without 'sex education. That kind of thing, I have no objection to. 5 year olds being taught about any kind of sex is unnecessary.

 

[Madeline]

I still think this would be better left to local school boards. And I have to wonder, in school districts like mine where cash is so scarce and the education goals are so rarely met, how exactly do we justify ladling on a duty to teach manners to the kids, report all their failings, and supply a grievance committee to hear all the bitching?

Usually I support all the anti-bullying laws that are proposed...but I think mebbe this one is ill-advised.

 

[California Girl]

The simplest way to deal, long term, with bullying is to start with very young children. If you show them that families come in all shapes and sizes, it's normal to them.

 

[Madeline]

I don't disagree, CG. I just question the wisdom of this approach...seems unduly heavy-handed to me.

 

[chanel]

We already have a bullying law here in NJ. I think its effective, but as a teacher, I can attest that most of the harassment goes on when adults are not present.

Different situations need different solutions. The feds need to focus on national issues; not playground squabbles. This will just open up more lawsuits if everybody's i's are not dotted. If a local case has merit, there are already legal avenues to pursue.

 

[Madeline]

Dropping word 'gay' from lyrics of popular children's song riles folks in Australia | cleveland.com

 

[chanel]

Wow. Talk about homophobia. Making a big deal out of homosexuality (either pro or con) is an adult problem; not something kids need to fret about. In the words of the great Pink Floyd "Teacher - leave them kids alone!"

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The Safe Schools Improvement Act seems to be a massive federal initiative to curb bullying and harrasment in the public schools of all states. CNN's "Anderson Cooper" had a segment tonight about whether this bill "advances a gay agenda". The bill requires the schools to record and report incidents of bullying and harrasment (to who? for what purpose?) but also to "prevent and respond to incidents" of bullying and harrasment as well as report same to parents and set up a grievance procedure for same.

The bill defines bullying and harrasment as follows:

(12) BULLYING- The term ‘bullying’ means conduct that--
‘(A) adversely affects the ability of one or more students to participate in or benefit from the school’s educational programs or activities by placing the student (or students) in reasonable fear of physical harm; and
‘(B) includes conduct that is based on--
‘(i) a student’s actual or perceived--
‘(I) race;
‘(II) color;
‘(III) national origin;
‘(IV) sex;
‘(V) disability;
‘(VI) sexual orientation;
‘(VII) gender identity; or
‘(VIII) religion;
‘(ii) any other distinguishing characteristics that may be defined by a State or local educational agency; or
‘(iii) association with a person or group with one or more of the actual or perceived characteristics listed in clause (i) or (ii).
‘(13) HARASSMENT- The term ‘harassment’ means conduct that--
‘(A) adversely affects the ability of one or more students to participate in or benefit from the school’s educational programs or activities because the conduct, as reasonably perceived by the student (or students), is so severe, persistent, or pervasive; and
‘(B) includes conduct that is based on--
‘(i) a student’s actual or perceived--
‘(I) race;
‘(II) color;
‘(III) national origin;
‘(IV) sex;
‘(V) disability;
‘(VI) sexual orientation;
‘(VII) gender identity; or
‘(VIII) religion;
‘(ii) any other distinguishing characteristics that may be defined by a State or local educational agency; or
‘(iii) association with a person or group with one or more of the actual or perceived characteristics listed in clause (i) or (ii).
‘(14) VIOLENCE- The term ‘violence’ includes bullying and harassment.’.

The objection made by Focus On Family etc. seems to be that the bill will require schools to teach students about homosexuality in order to prevent any bullying etc. based on it.

I'm not sure exactly how such a complaint should be met. If a little kid comes from a home with two gay parents and gets teased because of it, the bill seems to require the school to put a stop to it...but how can they do this without using the words "gay" or "homosexual"? Much as it pains me to admit it, I think anti-gay folks might finally have themselves a legitimate issue here.

I also wonder why this needs to be a federal issue. Bullying is an emerging issue, shaped in part by technology advances. Can't we allow the states or even the counties to flounder around awhile before we draw up a uniform nationwide consensus on how best to respond?

The bill is in Committee now, and might never emerge -- but if you'd like to have an impact, this might be the best time to make your opinion known to your representative.

H.R. 2262: Safe Schools Improvement Act of 2009 (GovTrack.us)

Bullying is not going to be controlled by any laws because the social attitudes actually reinforce bullying. This is just another attempt to expand federal power and will fail at its stated goal, and lead to unforeseen and unintended consequences.

Bullies often Mr Popular at school, study finds - www.smh.com.au

 

[Madeline]

I disagree that bullying cannot be controlled. Of course it can, and likely is to a degree now. Most all anti-social behavior can be curbed with appropriate sanctions.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I disagree that bullying cannot be controlled. Of course it can, and likely is to a degree now. Most all anti-social behavior can be curbed with appropriate sanctions.

The only way behavior like bullying can be changed is to remove the positive reinforcement the bullier gets from their peer group. Punishment only enhances peer group standing, thus rewarding the anti social behavior.

 

[Madeline]

No, there are other ways.

* Make the pay off for bullying too "expensive".

* Isolate the bully from the social setting.

* Create a pay off for resisting or reporting bullying.

Finding the proper remedy will be hard. So much depends on whether we are discussing the conduct of small kidlets, teens or adults. But it can be found....e.g., how many kidlets or their parents would welcome a notation on their school record that they were involved in bullying?

Anyway, it's this need to be able to tinker with various remedies that seems to me to make the federal bill unappealing.

BTW, I know you followed the case of the Mississippi school that cancelled its prom to prevent a lesbian student from attending with her girlfriend. I cannot imagine such a choice would be legal for the school district if this bill passes, can you? Do you think that's a good thing? (I do, mostly. I worry a bit about unintended consequences.)

 

[Smartt33]

The Safe Schools Improvement Act seems to be a massive federal initiative to curb bullying and harrasment in the public schools of all states. CNN's "Anderson Cooper" had a segment tonight about whether this bill "advances a gay agenda". The bill requires the schools to record and report incidents of bullying and harrasment (to who? for what purpose?) but also to "prevent and respond to incidents" of bullying and harrasment as well as report same to parents and set up a grievance procedure for same.

The bill defines bullying and harrasment as follows:

(12) BULLYING- The term ‘bullying’ means conduct that--
‘(A) adversely affects the ability of one or more students to participate in or benefit from the school’s educational programs or activities by placing the student (or students) in reasonable fear of physical harm; and
‘(B) includes conduct that is based on--
‘(i) a student’s actual or perceived--
‘(I) race;
‘(II) color;
‘(III) national origin;
‘(IV) sex;
‘(V) disability;
‘(VI) sexual orientation;
‘(VII) gender identity; or
‘(VIII) religion;
‘(ii) any other distinguishing characteristics that may be defined by a State or local educational agency; or
‘(iii) association with a person or group with one or more of the actual or perceived characteristics listed in clause (i) or (ii).
‘(13) HARASSMENT- The term ‘harassment’ means conduct that--
‘(A) adversely affects the ability of one or more students to participate in or benefit from the school’s educational programs or activities because the conduct, as reasonably perceived by the student (or students), is so severe, persistent, or pervasive; and
‘(B) includes conduct that is based on--
‘(i) a student’s actual or perceived--
‘(I) race;
‘(II) color;
‘(III) national origin;
‘(IV) sex;
‘(V) disability;
‘(VI) sexual orientation;
‘(VII) gender identity; or
‘(VIII) religion;
‘(ii) any other distinguishing characteristics that may be defined by a State or local educational agency; or
‘(iii) association with a person or group with one or more of the actual or perceived characteristics listed in clause (i) or (ii).
‘(14) VIOLENCE- The term ‘violence’ includes bullying and harassment.’.

The objection made by Focus On Family etc. seems to be that the bill will require schools to teach students about homosexuality in order to prevent any bullying etc. based on it.

I'm not sure exactly how such a complaint should be met. If a little kid comes from a home with two gay parents and gets teased because of it, the bill seems to require the school to put a stop to it...but how can they do this without using the words "gay" or "homosexual"? Much as it pains me to admit it, I think anti-gay folks might finally have themselves a legitimate issue here.

I also wonder why this needs to be a federal issue. Bullying is an emerging issue, shaped in part by technology advances. Can't we allow the states or even the counties to flounder around awhile before we draw up a uniform nationwide consensus on how best to respond?

The bill is in Committee now, and might never emerge -- but if you'd like to have an impact, this might be the best time to make your opinion known to your representative.

H.R. 2262: Safe Schools Improvement Act of 2009 (GovTrack.us)

The key issue in this bill, and on the topic is the definition of the term "bullying".
That is a problem in this bill. Bullying is much easier to define than they have made it. The reasons are more political than practical.

Teach the kids not to pick on others for any reason, not to make fun of anyone for any reason. Teach them that it is just wrong to do so. If they ask, is it wrong to make fun of... respond appropriately.

The other problem is that in the definition the government wants to use it becomes improper even to talk about these issues at all iof you feel there is something immoral about them. Talking about it is not bullying. You have an opinion, you express it, and move on. That expression needs to be a mature and peaceful one. Many adults have a problem with that. The Christian may say, if there is an appropriate reason to discuss it, I believe...and I get that from the Bible... A true Christian would do this in love and or kindness, not to offend.

The same would be true of an Atheist. He would, if the apptoptiate conversation develops, say I just don't believe... and I cannot accept the Bible. Nuff said. No need to argue, or even debate.

However, when it gets to the point of being a federal law, we have a problem that will not go away easily, even if mature people work on it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No, there are other ways.

* Make the pay off for bullying too "expensive".

Make increased self esteem, better health, and high social status too expensive. I know people that would pay millions for that, exactly how do you plan on making it so expensive that it will deter bullying?

* Isolate the bully from the social setting.

I think that would be impractical. Schools can only be expected to control what happens on school grounds, and the social setting extends beyond that. Unless you want to allow the government to follow kids around off school property there is no way to make this work in the real world.

* Create a pay off for resisting or reporting bullying.

I thought that was what I said. We need to change the social dynamic in such a way that the peer group reinforces the underdog, not the bully. I don't see that happening overnight, or through the actions of any government agency, no matter how localized.

Finding the proper remedy will be hard. So much depends on whether we are discussing the conduct of small kidlets, teens or adults. But it can be found....e.g., how many kidlets or their parents would welcome a notation on their school record that they were involved in bullying?

Not the permanent record! Next you will be threatening them with Mrs. Krabappel.

Anyway, it's this need to be able to tinker with various remedies that seems to me to make the federal bill unappealing.

BTW, I know you followed the case of the Mississippi school that cancelled its prom to prevent a lesbian student from attending with her girlfriend. I cannot imagine such a choice would be legal for the school district if this bill passes, can you? Do you think that's a good thing? (I do, mostly. I worry a bit about unintended consequences.)

Why do we need a law to make something that is illegal illegal again?

 

[syrenn]

If you want to stop bullying, don't punish the kids, punish the parents. Bullying is all about bad parenting.

 

[Big Fitz]

This legislation is as useful as tits on a boar hog. Useless, twice as confusing and will do nothing to help protect ANYONE... but will give police more work that could be better spent dealing with real, instead of invented criminals.

I can't think of one thug who's going to listen to the law if they decide to make some gay kid's life a living hell. They'll do it because it makes them feel good, and jail is probably better than their homelife.

 

[Madeline]

You raise a great point, my Big Fizzy friend. What does the bill provide as consequences for failure to adhere? I didn't review it in detail, but I don't think it's criminal. I think it's administrative....school districts that fall below these new standards would have federal funding issues.

And of course, all this language would create new causes of action -- against the school, the district, other parents, teachers, etc. Civilly, the fun will just not stop.

Yet another reason I think mebbe this is a bad idea.

 

[zzzz]

Bullying has always been around, it was around when I was in school in the 60's and 70's. It never was done around teachers or adults and the prevailing attitude among kids back then was you did not snitch on anyone. So there was always more of it around than thought. The bullies had their camp followers too. Today this has evolved into, I believe, a gangster thing. I do not think it can be eliminated, controlled to a certain extent maybe, but the federal government has no business making laws about bullying. And here is the thing about any bullying legislation or rules. Do you have to have witnesses to back the kid’s story up. It is a very slippery slope. And another thing is some parents do not care what their child does. Look at all the expulsions happening today.