The Myths Of Bullying Summary

In the article, “The Myths of Bullying” by John Cloud, bullying is described as an exaggerated epidemic. Cloud presents details of high-profile cases including; the school shooting at Chardon High School and a suicide at Rutgers University. The aforementioned school tragedies suggest that the widespread international attention that these cases have obtained have “cemented in public opinion” (Cloud, 2012) the idea that bullying has taken on a persistent upward trend in the United States. Furthermore, he attests that the drastic measures immediately implemented to prevent bullying in school districts have also contributed to the overwhelming fear among parents and students alike, that bullying is an absolute growing epidemic.

Research findings contradict the idea that bullying is a “spreading plague” or on the rise each year (Cloud, 2012). According to the U.S. Department of Justice, “37 percent of students” reported that they

do not feel safe while attending school because of bullying (Cloud, 2012). According to Rathus (2015), school phobia is defined as “fear of school –or of refusal to go to school” due to feelings about the environment as, “unpleasant, unsatisfying, or hostile, and it may be the case – as in the case of bullying (Rathus, 2015). However, since these statistical findings remained steady over many recent years, it can be stressed that bullying is actually not on the rise.
In the article, “Why Our Approach to Bullying is Bad for Kids” by Susan Porter, the term “bullying” is further explored. Specifically, Porter explains that there is not a “rise in incidents of bullying” but instead the expansion of the definition of the term has come to now include behavior once deemed “normal childhood behaviors”, to be viewed as “pathological and dangerous” (Porter, 2013).
Porter (2013) discovered the following regarding bullying: The term had come to include not only the classic forms of harassment between children, behaviors such as shaking down a kid for lunch money, beating up a smaller kid in the schoolyard, or a repeated hate speech. Now, it also included behaviors such as social exclusion, name-calling, teasing, sarcasm, and being unfriendly (Porter, 2013).
The idea that the act of bullying involves an alleged bully and a victim, is demystified in Cloud’s article. According to Psychologists, those who are bullied at some point in their life are expected to retaliate and seek revenge for the torments bestowed upon them in a school setting or on a social network (Cloud, 2012). Following the horrific bullying tragedies, both “stringent” and costly anti-bullying laws have been instated (Cloud, 2012). The protocol for reporting even a suspected act of bullying requires that any school official first report the incident. Eventually the complaint ends up in the accused student’s file, possibly affecting the child’s ability to achieve a higher education at any state university. School administrators are also required to train their employees to recognize the signs of bullying among students and learn what measures to take in order to prevent bullying from occurring. Although to date, no research has been presented to indicate the exact amount of funds needed to implement the new legislation, the anti-bullying law does not seem to factor in the size of school districts. For example, Warren County asserts that the “new law will cost $6,000 even though the township has only 427 students” (Cloud, 2012). Furthermore, some school districts have reported that there are not enough funds to hire/ assign an administrator, whom is responsible for actually investigating any acts of reported physical or cyber bullying within a 24-hour period in accordance with state legislation.
According to some researchers, “bullying in schools is an issue which, in spite of a strong body of research literature, and government guidance designed to reduce bullying, continues to affect an estimated 50%-80% of young people” (Slide and Johnson, 2014).

Some researchers have postulated that in order to help alleviate the issues surrounding bullying, it would be ideal to target those indirectly involved. In other words, friends or classmates who may witness any form of bullying should be encouraged to intervene, specifically, these “bystanders” should “understand that saying something about what [they] see isn’t always tattling” (Cloud, 2012). In an article written by, Slide and Johnson (2014) an ideal anti-bullying policy is one which id personalized, such that it includes what the children and young people of the school feel is bullying behavior, and also emphasizes that it is the responsibility of everyone “the whole school community” to report any instance of bullying to an appropriate adult or educator (Slide and Johnson,

2014).
Furthermore, Principal Robin Lowe states that “cool kids” are not always the bully and “outcasts” are not always the victim in a bullying incident. For example, according to Lowe, “99.9%” of parents initially distressed about terrible comments made by one student about their child, may later become shocked when they are presented with the “degrading” words produced by their own regarding another student. Thus, Lowe emphasizes that “most of us are both bully and victim” and “bystanders” of bullying should learn to do their part and take responsibility and “say something if they see something” (Cloud, 2012).
Despite the negative effects associated with bullying, I believe that there is no real widespread, epidemic regarding bullying. Society has exaggerated the incidence of bullying events and influenced parent’s thinking, thus causing them to succumb to the belief that normal school-age interactions are indeed bullying. In my opinion, the expanded definition of bullying is too broad. Kids should not be punished for behaviors that they do not understand. Students should receive more education instead of harsh punishments. Ultimately, I feel a positive approach should be implemented in the schools, such that all parties feel heard resulting in change and growth.
Although, I can understand that those who are bullied may experience increased difficulties in succeeding in school, or other traumatic symptoms compared to their “non-bullied peers,” (Slide and Johnson, 2014). However, I strongly believe it is counterproductive for educators or state legislature, to label a child as a bully or indirectly make it more difficult for those “bullies” to attend a state university. Firstly, I do not believe that it is possible for witnesses of an incident to always get the story straight or to obtain all of the facts behind any incident involving kids. It is possible that all parties involved are actually equally responsible for the hurtful things that were said or conducted. Secondly, I believe that everyone has the ability to change, especially children and we should not “superimpose on the childhood brain an adult-like capacity for intent and self-control” (Porter, 2013).
I believe that labeling a child as a bully by placing it in their file, has the potential to cause more harm. According to Porter (2013), “children can’t see beyond concrete and, so they will take labels like a bully or a victim and run with them, usually to their own detriment” (Porter, 2013). For example, if a child accepts the bully label and decides to identify with it, he or she may act in accordance with what he or she perceives to be how a bully should behave. In essence, “the painful dynamics that occur among children become carved in stone” (Porter, 2013). Furthermore, students learning that their educational goals may be inhibited, may begin to build-up anger and eventually lash out seeking revenge.
To help alleviate the burden on school districts to depend solely on anti-bullying programs in the classroom, parents should also make attempts to be aware of what their child is doing in school and online. Parents should be less close-minded about what they think their child is capable of doing and simply take precaution by assuming that their child has the potential to be both, the aggressor and the victim. This could help prevent actual incidents among other children from taking place once the child reaches the classroom. Furthermore, while in the classroom, I believe that teachers should implement methods that are simple and practical. For example, just stating or reminding students at the start of a class session that “put-downs” will not be tolerated in the classroom could make clear to children that educators understand the issues in their world and cares (Whitson, 2014).
As a parent of a child in middle school, I have witnessed a fair amount of bullying. When my son, Exavier, was in fifth grade, he was involved in a physical altercation with another student and was required to go before the school board. Due to the incident that occurred his seat in the school was being jeopardized. His teacher was able to support Exavier’s story that he was constantly being bullied and finally got fed up and acted out on his frustration. He was able to return to school while the other student was assigned to out of school suspension. Although, the student was punished and the bullying never actually stopped, I do not believe this student should be labeled a bully. I believe that we should not ignore when a child torments another person, however, I agree that “mistakes… should not result in the children receiving labels that limit our ability (and possibly our desire) to help them develop into responsible adults (Porter, 2013).
As a parent, I found it important to have conversations with my child and help him find alternative coping mechanisms for dealing with this harassment. As a parent, I felt it was important to let nature take its course. I never went up to my son’s school demanding for meetings with the principal or claiming that my child was an angel. I felt that it was important that I did not label my child as a victim, and I did not want Exavier to identify himself as one either, despite the very hurtful things said towards or about him. I did keep an open dialogue about the conflicts he experienced and sometimes checked him, if I felt that he may have responded in a negative manner. Eventually, the bullying did seem to stop towards him as the kids matured. In fact, these boys are now all best friends and respect each other.
Once bullied, Exavier now tells me stories of how he sees other kids get picked on and bullied at school. He tells me that it is hard for him to do something about it because he does not want to be a “snitch.” He tells me stories about how he will approach the “victim” and try and help him/her believe that things will get better. He tells me that he does not always remember to say something, but he always remembers to tell me when he does get the chance to help these students believe that everything will be OK. At this point, I have made attempts to encourage Exavier to report these incidents to his teachers, however, I am proud that he does not act as a typical bystander and simply laugh at or ignore the situation. I believe that he is taking an active role in helping his peers cope with the situation or at least making clear that someone cares about them.
I am relieved that steps were taken to resolve the situation involving my son, however, I feel that the goal of educators and parents alike should be to educate students and when an incident does occur, we should facilitate change. It should not be an option for teachers to do everything they can, to serve as positive role models for our kids at all times, even if it means the lecture they planned is delayed 2 minutes.