Is Crime a Learned Behavior?/ Social and Behavioral Aspects of Criminal Behavior

DIRECT BULLYING: CRIMINAL ACT OR MIMICKING WHAT HAS BEEN LEARNED?

LISA GARBY

Bullying has been around for ages, but in the past decade it has been in the spotlight because of stiicidal deaths and a push for legislation to put these bullies behind bars. Numerous national surveys report that a large percentage of bullying in schools is a form of direct btülying. Recently all but one state has now enacted harsher anti-bullying laws with zero tolerance policies in school districts. There is no doubt that bullying is occurring and changes need to be made, but do the btillies belong in jail or are they just mimicking behaviors they have learned?

The suicidal deaths of Phoebe Prince, Jon Carmichael, Jamey Rodemeyer, Eric Mohat, Kenneth Weishuhn, Jr. and Jessica Logan caught the nation's attention between the years 2007-2012. The common cause in all of these cases; each young person was bullied by their peers. Jon Carmichael endured being stripped, tied and placed upside down in a trash can as well as having his head placed in the toilet bowl as it was fiushed numerous times; all be- cause he was small in size. Phoebe Prince was followed, taunted, had cans thrown at her and harassed online; all because of a boy she dat- ed. Jessica Logan was harassed relentlessly by hundreds of girls; all because an ex-boyfiiend sent nude photos of her through his phone. In all of these cases, only Phoebe Prince's result- ed in local authorities bringing charges against those involved. Should individuals who direct- ly bully people be charged as criminals or are they victims as well?

When a person is subjected to physical vio- lence such as kicking, slapphig, and/ or punch- ing, or subjected to threats and name calling they are being directly bullied. (Carpenter & Ferguson, n.d., para. 1) If an adult uses phys- ical violence or makes threats against another human being they can be charged by law with assault or battery of varying degrees. Assault is defined as threatening someone with harm while battery is the actual physical violence against a person ("Assault and battery," n.d..

para.l). Even legislation includes bullying imder the terms harassment or assault with 25 states defining bullying together with harassment and/or intimidation (as cited in Brubacher, Fondacaro, Brank, Brown & Mill- er, 2009). Using these definitions it seems the logical step would be to charge a child who directly bullies as a criminal.

Schools seem to be agreeing with this mindset. Recently all states except Montana have taken steps to enforce anti-bullying laws. Of these, eighteen states provide a means for the victim to seek legal ramifications and nine states mandate that schools report bullying in- cidents to the police (Toppo, 2012). In 2011 New Jersey passed what is being touted as the toughest anti-bullying law in the nation. The "Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights" requires students to be expelled or suspended, places responsibility on administrators and employ- ees to report all incidences whether they oc- cin- in school or not or face discipline issues as drastic as losing their license, mandates a "school safety team" in all schools, requires superintendents to report detailed incidents to the state twice a year and the State Edu- cation Department posts grades on how each school is doing (Freidman, 2011). More and more zero tolerance laws are being enforced in schools, but what would that look like statistically?

448

Direct Bullying: Criminal Act or Mimicking What Has Been Learned? / 449

The U.S. Government Accountability Office recently analyzed four federal surveys on bullying and created the report School Bullying: Extent of Legal Protections for Vulnerable Groups Needs to Be More FuUy Assessed. Analysis of HBSC 2005/2006: Es- timates of Youth Who Reported Being Bullied for Certain Types of Bullying Behaviors show that 31.5 % of students were made fim of, called mean names and/or teased; 13.1% were called mean names because of their race or color; 8.5% were called mean names because of their religion; and 12.8% were physically hurt or locked indoors (GOA, 2012). Based on these statistics, it seems that a lai^e per- centage of students in at least eighteen states would have a population of students in juve- nile detention or jail.

Not all anti-buUying advocates believe this is the answer. While it is true that bullying is an issue, jail is not necessarily the answer nor is it necessarily the child who should be held responsible. Russlyn Ali, assistant secretary for civil rights for the Department of Educa- tion believes tbat reporting bullying incidents to the police should really be thought out by school officials because of the harm it might bring to tbe scbool culture (as cited in Toppo, 2012). Eliza Byard, head of Gay, Lesbian and Straigbt Education Network (GLSEN) be- lieves tbat if society locks tbese direct bullies up, adults are failing the children (as cited in Toppo, 2012). Taking it even fiirther Rosalind Wiseman, author of Queen Bees & Wannabes, places the blame on adults creating a culture of bullying and Jeannie Cbambers, motber of Kenneth Weishuhn Jr., states that the parents of bullies need to be held responsible for their children's behavior because sbe believes they leam the behavior at home (Toppo, 2012). If this is the case then the students are not crim- inals as some believe, but mimicking what they have leamed.

According to a report by Brubacher, et al. (2009), tbe messages parents send to

their children about the faimess of confiict resolution could lead to bullying. Statistics show that 60% of bullies in middle school will incur at least one criminal conviction by the age of 24 and a staggering 40% will incur three or more (as cited in Bmbacher, et al., 2009). Research fiuther shows child behav- iors are based in parental conduct; if parents bully then the child will likely bully. Bullies are also twice as likely to have been exposed to domestic violence (as cited in Brubacher, et al., 2009). Parents that are inconsistent in resolving coûfiicts, that use corporal punish- ment or punish their children when they are angry and with emotional outbursts, or that maltreat their children tend to have children who bully. The children in these homes are witnessing and experiencing poor confiict resolution and feel that they are being treated unfairly. These feelings become intemalized and in tum they tend to deal with confiict with behaviors consistent with direct bullying (Brubacher, et al., 2009).

Further adding support to this perspective is a study conducted by Teisl, Rogosch, Oshri & Cicchetti (2012). The authors examined 470 children fi'om high-risk neighborhoods aged 6-13 of whom almost half were exposed to some form of maltreatment. They concluded that children who were maltreated were more likely to be identified as bullies and tend to be confi-ontational when dealing with conflict.

Bullying programs have been implement- ed nationwide, but with recent statistics prov- ing there is no dramatic change, something more needs to be done. Bullying is not just a scbool issue; it extends past the school walls into the community and might begin in the home. A possible answer to deciding wbether these young people are criminals or are just mimickiag leamed behaviors Ues in design- ing, implementing and evaluating a program that encompasses not just the students, but the entire community. This dilemma calls for fiirther research to be conducted with a focus

450 / Education Vol. 133 No. 4

on the direct bullying. Although personal interviews have limitations, these along with self-disclosure stirveys and statistics fi-om schools taken before and after an intervention program has been put in place might just pro- vide the answer.

References Assault and battery, (n.d.) Retrieved from http:/Avww.

criminal defenselavvyer.com/assaul tAndBattery.cfrn Bmbacher, M. R., Fondacaro, M. R., Brank, E. M.,

Brown, V. E., & Miller, S. A. (2009). Procedural justice in resolving family disputes: Implications for childhood bullying. Psychology, Public Policy, And Law, 15(3), 149-167. doi:10.1037/a0016839

Carpenter, D. & Ferguson, C.J. .(n.d.) Direct bullying versus indirect bullying. Retrieved from http://www. netplaces.com/deal ing-with-bullies/types-of-bully- ing/direct-bullying-versus-indirect-bullying.htm)

Friedman, M. (2011, January 7). N.J. Gov. Christie approves toughest anti-bullying law in the country. Retrieved from http://www.nj.com/news/index. ssC2011/01 /nj_gov_ehHstie_approves_tough.html

Teisl, M., Rogosch, F. A., Oshri, A., & Ciccbetti, D. (2012). Differential expression of social dominance as a function of age and maltreatment experi- ence. Developmental Psychology, 48(2), 575-588. doi:10.1037/a0024888

The U.S. Government Accountability OfBcc (GOA). (2012). School bullying: Extent of legal protec- tions for vulnerable groups needs to be more fully assessed. Retrieved from http://www.gao.gov/as- sets/600/591202.pdf

Toppo, G. (2012, June 13). Bullies as criminals?. USA Today, pp. lA, 2A.

Copyright of Education is the property of Project Innovation, Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.