Email

Liability for cyberbullying outside playground gates

By Jason Newman

Posted November 14, 2008 09:43:00

Bullying has long been part of school life.

The continued verbal and physical intimidation of a less powerful or popular student by another student or a group has, in days gone by, been seen as inevitable presence in education.

Since the late 80s and early 90s, schools have realised their responsibility for controlling, in a systematic way, the bullying that goes on at school. Rare is the school today that does not have a bullying policy in one form or another. Even with concentrated effort, bullying is difficult for schools to control.

The perpetrators try hard to strike when away from the teacher's gaze; school culture or fear may discourage the bullying "target" from reporting the incidents. When schools do find out about the bullying, or ought to have found out, they are sometimes held liable for the psychological fallout that can result.

Cyberbullying is the latest incarnation of the age-old problem, and it is in a form that may be even harder for schools to tackle than "ordinary" bullying has ever been. It is the same continued intimidation of a target, but via the ever increasing range of communication technologies. This form of bullying has grown with the technology it uses, and the even greater apparent secrecy it affords.

Schools can be held liable for cyberbullying in the future if the laws of negligence are not constrained by the school gate.

The extent of the school's duty of care to the student is not necessarily limited within the school's walls or once the final bell for the day has rung and the pupil has walked out of the school gate.

There were a number of court findings recently where schools were liable for student injury outside the school premises.

Most of the anecdotal evidence is that cyberbullying occurs outside schools. With the increasing use of internet-enabled camera phones, it is only a matter of time before there is no distinction between "real world" bullying and cyberbullying at school.

There have been many disturbing examples of bullying at schools being filmed by camera phones and posted on internet sites, combining the old and new in a volatile mix.

The University of Melbourne study of Australian schoolchildren aged 11 to 17 years (Cyber-bullying in Australian Schools: profiles of adolescent coping and insights for school practitioners 2007) found more than one in five had experienced some form of cyberbullying.

This is not surprising given that 70 per cent of Australian children report visiting online communities at least once a month and one in four children aged 6 to 13 own a mobile phone, with ownership shooting up to 70 per cent and more for the over-13-year-olds.

Initially this new form of bullying has taken place outside the school environment, in chat rooms, through text messages and online, but with the advent of "always on" technology, it is easier for it to happen at school.

It is well established that a school owes a duty to its students to take care of them when on school property. Courts have, in limited circumstances, extended that duty of care outside the school gates, and usually the duty is extended when the school either has notice of harm to a student, or ought to have noticed, and is able do something to avoid or reduce that harm.

When a student is repeatedly intimidated at school and the school knows about it, then the school must take steps to try to protect the target and counsel the offender or offenders.

Schools must educate students that online intimidation is not just harmful, but can sometimes be classed as criminal. With the increasing tendency of courts to find schools responsible for events even beyond their walls, it won't be long before a school is found responsible for cyberbullying.

Jason Newman is a partner at TressCox Lawyers.

Tags: education, bullying, schools, internet, law-crime-and-justice, crime, antisocial-behaviour, australia

Comments (116)

Comments for this story are closed. No new comments can be added. If you would like to have your say on this issue, you can do so via the Emails section of our Opinion pages.

• Jo:

  14 Nov 2008 10:49:56am

  Sticks and stones may break my bones but texts will never harm me...if I turn my phone off. Not to make light of bullying, but with regards to cyber bullying, can't youths be reminded that they can turn off their electronic devices or block unwanted callers?

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Paul Smith:

    14 Nov 2008 12:40:18pm

    Jo,
    
    In theory it sounds great. But do you honestly think it will solve the problem?

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • Jo:

      14 Nov 2008 3:07:50pm

      It won't necessarily solve the bullying, but it will solve the cyberbullying problem.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • Geordie:

        14 Nov 2008 4:40:05pm

        No, it won't. Why should a student be unable to use the Internet, a mobile phone or other modern technology because some bottom-feeding spawn of stupid-as-soup parents is bullying them? This is tantamount to saying that one can avoid physical bullying buy staying at home.

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • yabbie:

        14 Nov 2008 10:24:22pm

        I agree Jo. Students could still use the internet, mobile phone or other modern technology without cyber-bullying.
        
        Usage can most often be anomonous and we dont have to share our phone numbers with everyone. People should take some responsability in who they share thier personal details with as well as the passing on of other peoples information.

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • meg:

        16 Nov 2008 4:32:02pm

        I'm with you Geordie. Blame the irresponsible parents of feral kids, not the schools and tax-payers.

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • Norm McMullen:

      16 Nov 2008 10:31:16am

      Jo, it is a blot on the human race and it has been going on since we lived in caves and unfortunately will continue.
      It puts the bully in poor light - revealing inferiority complex that has to be constantly stroked by standing over someone, usually someone smaller than the bully. School is a place where this occurs a lot because there is always someone smaller than the bully. Reaching adulthood brings a different situation - everyone the same size and the risk of retaliation too great. The bully gains experience, but it is doubtful his mental attutude changes. Now he goes to the pub and takes on board some 'dutch courage' and goes home and beats the wife. Females can usually be relied on to be smaller than the male!

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Sam Guest:

    14 Nov 2008 12:51:56pm

    Invariably, cyberbullying is conducted in forums like msn and therefore the offenders could/should be blocked out for offensive behaviour by the forum administrator, unfortunately they are not. As you say, the ultimate way of dealing with it is to stop using the service. As it was pre-internet, if you ignore the bully, they will lose interest.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • Tag:

      14 Nov 2008 3:04:59pm

      All cyber-bullying is traceable, be it by phone or internet. All you need is the capacity for access to the ID of the bully.
      
      Once you do, you record all of the messages. You do this for about six months. Then you send a copy of all this information to the school, the police and the parents of the bullies.
      
      How would you like to read six months of abuse sent by your child?
      
      Of course, there is another alternative. If I were being bullied online, it would be great incentive to learn more about computer hacking. There is so much you can do to even the score, such as computer destruction, or data theft.
      

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • Jeremy:

        14 Nov 2008 3:45:24pm

        This is false. It is exceptionally easy to create fake accounts etc. and to even use them through proxies and other methods of masking IPs and details of where the message comes from. It's also possible to do similar things with SMSs, although more difficult. It is, however, very easy to send anonymous SMSs via internet software, so easy to be a "cyberbully" anonymously.

        Agree (2) Alert moderator

    • Jeremy:

      14 Nov 2008 3:42:43pm

      MSN is not a forum, it's a chat client, and it doesn't allow for any kind of moderation at all. Of course the person being attacked on MSN has the full power to block the person attacking if they would like to.
      
      
      

      Agree (1) Alert moderator

    • Andrew:

      16 Nov 2008 2:11:05pm

      Just ignoring bullies never worked in the first place lol. I love it how people just keep trotting out the same old garbage over the decades and centuries. Reminds me of Homer Simpson burning his hand on the stove only applied to 100-year spans.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • meg:

        16 Nov 2008 4:44:04pm

        People always advise others to "just ignore them" until they themselves are harangued, harassed and threatened for no logical reason. All of a sudden it is realised how difficult it is to do so - even for a well-grounded adult. Little brats with parents too lazy to monitor their feral kids properly preferring to throw money and trinkets at them rather than spend time socialising them properly, should be heavily fined or jailed for threatening members of society in this or any other form. If these ferals are at school to prepare them for life in the real world - this is the only coarse of action school/society to take - a taste of reality, by demonstrating what will happen if they go out into the streets and threaten/harass or assault a member of the public. A visit to court and a night in a cel might wake them up. Perhaps being dragged behind the pub and given a good hiding might 'impress' into their thick skulls just what will happen in reality if they continue these habits into their adult lives.

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • BP:

    14 Nov 2008 3:15:05pm

    This may be a bit naive Jo.
    
    Turning the device off is only going to delay the delivery.
    
    Also, blocking unwanted callers is an option, but how often will the need to block someone become apparent BEFORE the first harmful text?
    
    
    Another point which I haven't seen much discussion on is the act of talking about someone behind their back via chat rooms etc. You can abstain from the chat room, but that won't stop these bullies from making up stories about you, which can then be further spread around the playground the good old fashioned way (no mobile devices required). I know it's always happened & it always will, but the information age we are in now means it can happen faster & be more widespread.
    
    In days gone by it was easier to ignore, & would eventually die due to lack of oxygen. But these days, by the very nature of chat rooms the comments are often in writing, & just don't go away.
    
    Everyone should know that the pen is mightier than the sword (think legal cases where written communication is presented as evidence), & most people will know of cases where false info. (think hoax emails etc) just never die once released onto the internet. The target/victim may try to address the issue, & think it has been dealt with, but as sure as God made little green apples, once the comments are in cyberspace there is the potential for them to resurface at some stage in the future to a completely new audience, who are likely to believe/repeat them because it was in writing.
    
    To say sticks & stones may break my bones etc. is true, but I wonder if that phrase wasnt coined by someone who had forgotten the mental anguish that can result from victimisation, name calling & tormenting by peers.
    

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • DG:

      14 Nov 2008 4:23:57pm

      I agree with what you're saying, however I think you'll find that kids using 'chatrooms' are an overused cliche. Granted, many, many of them use MSN, however, in an MSN conversation, unless the conversation if saved by one side or the other, the comments are lost.
      
      I agree in principle though, I just think that the problem isn't as big as it seems to be made out to be.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • BP:

        14 Nov 2008 6:23:48pm

        I use MSN & Skype, & find their HISTORY to be very useful - all my chat saved for later perusal etc. I know a lot of people aren't aware of it (they should be more aware of what they are doing), but it's still there.
        
        I may seem to be jumping at shadows a bit, but I've seen children as young as 7 destroyed by classroom victimisation,

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • meg:

        16 Nov 2008 4:48:49pm

        Agree BP. I have also seen teachers who are very dedicated and talented, soul-destroyed by little ferals who know all about their rights but have parents who have never taken the time to talk to them about responsibilities towards others including the proper use of technologies provided.
        
        Character assassination, menacing, threatening or assault in any form has the potential for permanent harm, regardless of the person age, status or position. These peopple nad their families need to be made accountable for their actions and the consequences should reflect the reality of what would happen if they went down the street and tried that on to a adult face to face. They should be charged, fined and incarcerated - anything to knock some sense into them AND their slack-arse parents.

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • AJ:

    14 Nov 2008 5:17:47pm

    There are actually some cases where students are seriously hurt or exposed to degredation and then have the incident posted on the net. Turning off your phone won't make that go away.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • Somewhat Perplexed:

      15 Nov 2008 7:05:07pm

      Turning off the phone will do nothing.
      
      You need to make yourself unattractive to bullies.
      
      Being a martial artist, I have a special skill in this regard but the concept remains...it is only when you can confidently stand your ground will these people will go away and annoy someone else. My method was to learn to kick and punch but there are plenty of other methods out there - horses for courses really. It gets to the set of social skills you develop for yourself so you can engage in life.
      
      Also, there has been mention of legalities in other entries. As a middle class person, one cannot rely on the law to help, it is just too expensive to utilize and it is never there when you need it.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • meg:

        16 Nov 2008 4:50:16pm

        That makes it alright does it - intimidate a bully with the 'tiger-claw' and the problem is solved when the little dingo moves on to someone else who doesn't know chop suey - that's the ticket!

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Kteacher:

    14 Nov 2008 10:38:18pm

    One thing that disturbs me in particular is the organising of fights or assaults with the purpose of posting the video on the net. I broke up a fight recently where at least 3 kids were filming different angles of the action presumably for editing and posting to make points in the bullying game. I reached for a phone to try to catch the evidence but the kid was quick and threw the phone to the ground immediately blaming me for wrecking his phone, threatening me with not only legal action but the fury of his father. The kid got a 2 week holiday from school. My own phone was stolen that same day and there was no recourse action because everything I take onto school property is at my own risk...... Go figure.
    

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • petros:

      16 Nov 2008 5:01:29pm

      Kteacher...hang in there..same stuff as the kid who says "you can't say/do that to me or I'll tell my parents. let them do it. So long as you record everything done and cite witnesses. They learn this form home or other kids who have leanrt it from home. It's like the kids who phine home to say the teacher is being mean to me in class. They need to be pulled up otherwsie they'll go right through life like that.
      In all this frustration we still are there for them...I hope.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Kteacher:

    14 Nov 2008 10:46:10pm

    Bting back random bag searches, ban all mobile technology devices, apply the ball payne hammer rule to all mobile technology contraband regardless of its cost or "my dad'll spew atcha'" calls from kids. These devices are evil, addictive and cause cancers in chronic users, they disrupt the teaching process and cause unwanted stress for teachers. Ban, Shame and Destroy!!!!

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • Gary:

      15 Nov 2008 1:32:19am

      No device is evil. Other than that, I have no problem with this view whatsoever. I would be quite happy to see a COMPLETE ban on the importation of mobile phones that are fitted with cameras. Years ago, when someone was taking photographs, it was fairly obvious. Now, U don't think twice when U see someone with a phone... but are they using the phone, or photographing for some other dastardly purpose ? You can't tell, yet it's your right to know. Most folks realise that it's an erosion of their rights until THEY are the target.
      
      A cruel kid in the playground, a phone camera, the internet and photoshop. A recipe for disaster.
      
      I agree. Get personal mobile technologies out of schools.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • meg:

      16 Nov 2008 4:56:07pm

      Right on - I'm with you. I think THE PARENTS (of these little ferals who are not so dumb and thick-skulled that they know all their rights in regard to bag searches, personal properties and push teachers to the brink of despair in exercising those rights)...must have some idea of what their kids are like at school - theuy give them the phone or allow them to keep them - the PARENTS should be tarred and feathered along with the little ferals they bred, sent to school at the earliest possible age for free baby-sitting and cause breakdown, suicide and other harm upon teachers and the much more worthwhile kids who go to school to get a education and a good UAI - lets look after them and stop pandering to this rubbish whose most fitting place is at a land-fill site.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Gritpipe:

    15 Nov 2008 9:44:37am

    Sorry Jo but I feel you may be unaware of the form this bullying takes. Even if you turn the phone off the text message will still come in when you turn it back on. Then there's the social networking sites. My daughter, who's a little overweight, copped a bagging on a classmates website. There was also some drivel on there about their school. We drew it to the attention of the school and the perpetrator was suspended. Take action I say.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • sandshoe:

    16 Nov 2008 4:32:11am

    the answer is...every case that can be proved...follow it through properly...prosecute >> heavy fines >> confiscation of equipment >> and fine the parents too if they allow a known offender to access banned equipment. no softly softly on this just because they are young.
    
    when we hear young people are suiciding because of unbearable emotional, mental and psychological torment by others...we should not wait around. if my child was a perpetrator, i would do everything to erase any idea they had - that they could continue to get away with it.
    
    never forget...children have committed suicide because of such overwhelming pressure. and with the highest suicide rate in the world...we should be ashamed into immediate action.
    
    the cases that cannot be proved, may not number the majority, but some of them may be the most harmful - taking advantage of complete anonymity via internet cafes. this can be thwarted to some extent by insisting photo ID is presented before access to equipment. photos of offenders...can be put on the net for internet cafes to check. all the above, with IP addresses and logs of access should do a lot to stem this problem.
    
    any victims reading...it is your job to report offenders immediately...dont give them time to keep blackmailing you into a deeper hole. expose them fast...
    
    any offenders reading...i'd like to know how many of you became offenders - after - you had become a victim.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

• Doh:

  14 Nov 2008 10:52:57am

  Schools must educate? What is the penalty if they don't successfully cure every bully.
  
  In the good old days ignorance of the law was no defence. Perhaps that simple message could be passed on by parents to their children.
  
  Schools are having enough trouble teaching reading and writing let alone educating on everything from bullying to xenophobia.
  
  Yes, schools have a duty of care to do what they reasonably can to take steps to avoid harm to those in their care. The question is what is reasonable for institutions faced with ever more incompetent parenting.

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Steve:

    16 Nov 2008 7:35:32am

    Schools have a common law duty of care to their students, and mental harm falls squarely within the negligence rubric nowdays.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

• Bullfrog:

  14 Nov 2008 11:07:04am

  Whilst I can understand the concerns of schools being responsible for actions outside school hours, and outside their nominal scope, it seems to me that the central common area is the school.
  
  Without the school, the student would not be targetted. As such, the school is an 'enabler' for bullying, and has a duty to prevent that, even if the abuse is occurring outside of school hours.
  
  Schools have been sued, successfully, for not providing a safe environment for students, for the emotional and psychological damage caused, etc. With that in mind, schools need to actively engage with parents and students to prevent the problem, correct the behaviour of minor instances, and as a last result, punish the perpetrators.
  
  How to prevent is a very interesting question. In my limited experience, a full school culture induction package, clearly expressing what is allowed, what isn't allowed, and what the outcomes are going to be, to both parents and students, seems to be a starting point. Having sufficient resources for the school to investigate issues is another. And where necessary, having public examples of where students got it very wrong, and are no longer part of the school community.
  
  

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

• Lindsay Cooper:

  14 Nov 2008 11:09:03am

  Start by teaching kids,
  
  "To know and understand yourself is the most important thing in life, all else will follow without effort."
  
  This kind of bullying is easy to control, just erase it and forget.

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

• chalkie:

  14 Nov 2008 11:10:20am

  Bit of a beat up. The lawyer writer knows that the 'out-of-school -grounds' libility of schools extends to such things as school bus stops that are unsupervised (whereas others were) and similar, minor extensions to traditional realms of school responsibillity.
  
  That bullies bully kids outside of a school is not within the ambit of schools to address (unless, like at private schools like mine, parents sign contracts allowing the school to expel a child for behaviour 'prejudicial to the good reputation of the school' - including such extra-curricular nastiness).
  
  Here is a recent case of cyber bullying encountered at my school: a bunch of kids went onto World of Warcraft (internet fantasy game) and 'mugged' another child's character and stole all of his weapons and gold which were worth money in the real world. While part of the game, the intent was to bully the kid. That one went to the keeper: hard to see how the school could adrees that one.

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Evil Atheist Conspirator:

    14 Nov 2008 1:00:36pm

    If items in WoW were worth real-world money, and if they could be taken as you describe, then real-world charges of theft could be applied.
    
    Just as well items can't be taken like this, and just as well they aren't worth real world money (despite the fact that people illegally sell "their" accounts).
    
    Perhaps the child was just making up stories to get others into trouble? Another form of bullying, it seems to me.
    
    (Terms of use & End user license agreement viewable at www.worldofwarcraft.com)

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • Alex:

      14 Nov 2008 3:43:01pm

      Just an FYI, breaking an EULA isn't really illegal, it's a civil matter between two parties, not a criminal matter dealt with between the state and the party responsible.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Ben:

    14 Nov 2008 3:57:59pm

    Hi chalike,
    
    I play WoW and I certainly know that you can easily report offensive or inapropriate behaviour to the in game Game Masters (GMs) and they will sort out the issue (the terms and conditions that you frequently have to accept each time a new patch is released state these conditions quite clearly).
    
    Also, high value items a character wears are either BOP (Bind On Pick-up) or BOE (Bind On Equip) which means once your character is wearing them they cannot be used by another character - they are bound to you.
    
    The only way I could see any items (including in game currency) being stolen is if they learn of the individuals account login details (which as with any login system should always be kept secret).
    
    So just to confirm, there is no way to 'mug' another character in WoW (you can fight them if they are of the opposite faction and flagged but you can't take items from them).
    
    Note there are also ways of blocking other characters from chatting with you or on general chat, trade, etc. windows in game (trust me I have had to use this a few times).
    
    Also, Blizzard Entertainment warn if items (such as gold or another persons account) are bought for real money they can and will suspend your account (and you will have to start a new account). This is all aimed at trying to prevent people out there selling in game content for real money (they only want people using in game currency).
    
    Hope this helps (I think Blizzard do a good job at keeping WoW a fairly safe MMORPG).

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

• allan warren:

  14 Nov 2008 11:11:59am

  Only because lawyers are out to make a buck. When society can get back to people accepting responsibility for their own actions and not blame it on those who can pay out a compensation claim then schools will not be blames for everything. The real blame has to be the parentds allowing the access to the interenet, why not blame the internet instead, they have plenty of money, or perhaps we can blame the neighbour because he was mowing his lawn at the tme. Get real.

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • geoff:

    14 Nov 2008 2:48:20pm

    very good point. one of the many reasons that education has gone so dramatically down hill the last decade or so is the influence of the lawyers. so much education policy is now based around the risks of liability as dreamed up by the vultures of litigation that the kids are missing out-big time.
    ps i started teaching about the same time we got colour tv.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • meg:

      16 Nov 2008 5:01:38pm

      Goeff
      The only reason education at State schools appears to have gone down in recent years is that schools are being asked to continually take on roles that were traditionally handled by parents, carers or extended family.
      
      That State schools are often used as a dumping ground for all the rubbish private schools dont want or can't handle creates the illusion that private is better and safer and that this constitues the exhorbitant fees charged. It rarely has nothing to do with the quality of the teacher or the cosmetic facade of the buildings and grounds. If State Principals had the same power to expel, the little ferals and slack parents would quickly pull into line with the rest of society. At present rights outweigh responsibility and the vast majority of god kids are suffering.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Steve:

    16 Nov 2008 7:36:40am

    Any excuse to bag lawyers...

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

• RG:

  14 Nov 2008 11:26:50am

  It's stating to obvious that schools are still liable for the happenings of their student outside of school while they are wearing their uniform and on their way home, just as employers are liable for their employees while they are on their way to work or home.
  
  So, a student could be liable while bullying another on their way to school or home by way of telecommunications, what's new? However, attempting to even suggest this extends to a student bulling another student while both are at home on weekdays or weekends is plain stupid.
  
  

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Evil Atheist Conspirator:

    14 Nov 2008 1:22:15pm

    If the cyber-bullying happens via a school-provided email account, or school-provided internet connection, then when it happens is likely irrelevant. The school is responsible for ensuring their students adhere to appropriate standards of behaviour when using school equipment & services.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

• blue:

  14 Nov 2008 12:23:48pm

  It seems to me that a few of the commentors are mistaking assault with bullying.
  
  Bullying does not have to include physical assault - but it includes intimidation, threats, exclusion, harassment and a variety of things that may not be physically violent. No person should have to work or study in such an environment, or 'live' with it. All people have a right to use telecommunications without fear of bullying. So turning your mobile off, is not a solution.
  
  As someone who has been subject to bullying in the workplace, I can tell you that despite policies, its not the done thing to complain, as the consequences for the complainant (the person on the receiving end) often reinforce the right of the bully to behave that way. My bully was REWARDED and reinforced in that behaviour. I left because I could. Schoolies looking for an HSC don't have that luxury.
  
  Until we penalise the institutions that reinforce and permit these activities (and we should also be suing the parents of the little horrors in school bullying cases), we'll see it survive in the great Aussie culture.

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • chalkie:

    14 Nov 2008 12:31:32pm

    Suing the parents is nonsense: parents are not liable for the actions of their children.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • blue:

      14 Nov 2008 1:08:53pm

      I disagree with you.
      
      If the parents know about it and failed to act, then you can easily run a vicarious liability or joint liability (as they supported and enabled the crime) case against the parent. After all, if they don't act to stop their child they are aiding and abetting a crime - in fact, they are supporting the little horror in commiting it. Its as if they committed the crime themselves, through an agent.
      
      

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • Bullfrog:

      14 Nov 2008 1:13:41pm

      Well, kids aren't responsible (by law), so their guardians must be . . .
      
      Alternatively sue the school for failing to provide a workplace free from discrimination, harassment, and could quite reasonably be described as unsafe . . .
      
      Then again, you could take the approach of one parent (of a bullied child), who gave their kid some rather specific, and nasty, close combat techniques, and in turn the bullied kid ended up permanently injuring the bullies . . . not the approach I'd like to take.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • meg:

        16 Nov 2008 5:07:53pm

        When kids are past the 'age of reasoning' and they knowingly nad gleefully set about harassing, threatening or assaulting other members of society - they SHOULD be charged as adults - because schools are meant to prepare children for the real world. Show them what they are in for if they keep it up as an adult - I doubt that police or any court will protect them from the back-alley thrashing they so thoroughly deserve.
        (yes I am a parent of two boys - they have knows and understood from a very early age the basic concept of respect and self-respect. By age five I had asked both of them ewhat the following means and they could answer correctly..."You are the most important person in the world but you are no better than anyone else - what does this mean?" In both cases they could answer "It means everyone is important and special"). I asked both children this question BEFORE they started pre-school and BEFORE they started school proper.

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • poorvictim:

      14 Nov 2008 1:15:16pm

      Excuse me? If a ten year old commits a crime the parents are not liable? So parents have no duty of care but schools do? Chalkie you have convinced me of life on other planets.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • chalkie:

        14 Nov 2008 1:49:11pm

        Perhaps there is a moral, but certainly not a legal, liability on parents.
        
        Just consider the consequences of making parents liable for their darling child's crimes: the most common 'crime' is theft. Imagine the nightmare situation of parents being held responisble, perhaps convicted of a crime and the results for their employment, of every crime (stolen hat, stolen phone, racist taunt etc) commited by their child.
        
        Imagine the situation of schools actively reporting to police every misdemeanor of every child?

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • Ms Motown:

        14 Nov 2008 4:24:24pm

        Chalkie, whilst parents can be (and are) found liabile in civil law for the actions of children under 18, they are not liable in criminal law for the criminal act of a child. there is a world of difference between the criminal law (acts that are deemed to be a crime by the State) and civil law (where one citizen sues another for a civil...not a criminal...wrong).

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • chalkie:

        15 Nov 2008 6:54:46am

        At least in QLD it seems that the burden of proof to determine parental responsibility is quite high. I believe the relevant act is the Juvenile Cirme Act (1992). I have been told that only cases of extreme parental failure to supervise the child would leave them liable. There would, I presume, be a need for the bullied child to prove that the child bullied suffered financial loss, that this was the result of bullying and that the acts of bullying that occured specifically while the parent was not providing sufficient supervision (and this is not a high bar) as opposed to bullying occuring in situations where no parental supervsion was reasonable. And I think there are fairly low caps (a few thousand dollars) to such responsibility.
        
        End result: I know of no parent sued for their child's bullying.

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • rfnk:

        14 Nov 2008 8:02:04pm

        Actually it's easy to imagine. Imagine a world where such crimes weren't acceptable. Imagine a world where communities had the wherewithall to say to negligent families - we're not prepared to put up with you and your children destroying our lives anymore. Imagine a world where tolerance of alternative behaviour and difference, and other forms of simple decency were highly regarded but bullying, property destruction, theft, environmental vandalism, assault are never tolerated. That's the kind of place I grew up in, in Australia but the airheads and lawyers have taken that away from us, and we've let them.

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • petros:

        16 Nov 2008 4:48:57pm

        Chalkie...what a cop-out.......not legal. It's amazing how that term floats on the tide of manipulative legal eagles and others.
        Sadly we parents do have to bear some of this responsibilty because it is often our lack of modelling, leadership and guidance which leads to children making decisions.
        We need to show them the strategies on how to cope and how to make better decisions. Big Job? Sure is.
        Other wise when they become parents they certainly have poor strategies to apply themselves.
        We know ther are offences committed at a certain age are quite indictable. Parents are involved intrinsically...like it or not.

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • Doh:

        14 Nov 2008 1:50:58pm

        Parents have a duty of care, but try proving that the duty was breached, and that the breach caused the damage.
        
        Yes, schools have a duty of care to those in their care.
        
        The acts of children who are by virtue of their age deemed incapable of committing a crime are not crimes, and most certainly are not deemed to be crimes committed by their parents.
        
        

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • DG:

        14 Nov 2008 4:28:55pm

        Just as the school isn't LIABLE for things that the child does outside of school grounds or hours (although they may be RESPONSIBLE in some cases), parents can't be liable for things that their child does at school, unless they fail to act on it once they know about it.
        
        PS Apologies for the capitalizations, I can't make them italicized

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • petros:

      14 Nov 2008 1:33:50pm

      So Chalkie the parenst who are meant to be modelling for the child and guiding the child can now opt out when the child makes a mistake in life but can cash ij when the child is heroic, wins awards and stars at sports? yes the child has certain culpability but being children they still need guidance.
      so the teacher who is blamed for some action is responsible? C'mon. Kids stuff up just like we do and maybe they learn form watching us???
      No , Mum and dad need to sit down and wear it with them. Ther's much to be gained by working it out together.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • katie:

      14 Nov 2008 1:38:34pm

      I think I almost agree....... what is suing parents teachning children about thier action - youth based community servicce programs might help these people learn thier are consequences to thier actions

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • rfnk:

      14 Nov 2008 7:55:04pm

      Parents are not responsible for their kids' actions but schools are? You're talking like a lawyer Chalkie. It's really unpopular to sue parents and the financial outcomes are rarely worthwhile anyway so lawyers don't do it. School systems, governments? Well! There's a real honeypot so go for it! never mind about the consequences - diverting schools away from their actual role of providing students with a practical education, increasing the degree to which our country has become a nanny state etc.
      
      If my dog gets out and bites someone, I'm responsible. If my child does the same, why am I not responsible? The school does not own my child, the Government does not own my child - I am the legal guardian of my child. Until my child becomes an adult, her actions are my, parental responsibility.
      
      The sooner we get rid of legal industry interference in our lives and accept that valuing and expecting parental and individual responsibilities are the only way we can return to being a resourceful and productive society, the better.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • Blue:

        15 Nov 2008 8:31:05am

        Oi! I'm a lawyer!!! And you're agreeing with me!
        
        Actually, what you want to get rid of is the societal norms that permit the bullying behaviour in the first place. The only way you can set benchmarks for the whole of society is by passing a law that says this is the acceptable benchmark (like its not okay to murder someone).
        
        And have the rest of society support the reporting and prosecution of crime.
        
        And, on a further note, if a prosecution for crime is unsuccessful, it is possible to sue under civil jurisdiction. I would like to see a few of those leveled at the parents of bullies who continue to practice their bad behaviours...

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • rfnk:

        16 Nov 2008 12:17:25pm

        Wouldn't we all!! But our legal system is structured so that ordinary people cannot access this avenue. Who would pay lawyers and barristers their ridiculously high fees to take on a case like this? What would be the outcome even if you won? The solution lies in systemic change to make these kinds of parents legally responsible and liable for the actions of their children. Lawyers who suggest that ordinary people have recourse to the legal system to resolve injustices are part of the problem, not the solution.

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • katie:

    14 Nov 2008 1:05:46pm

    Look I agree if that bullying is happening at school, but outside of school hours I think this is the responsibility of parents to 'police' if issues arise then of course parents schools and students should work together to resolve these issues but how much can a school be accountable for a child ouside of school hours - really
    
    If its happening at school, well it shouldnt theres no excuse - particuarly as most school rules ban the use of mobiles, internet based messaging, facebook etc on school property - tougher policing of this in schools, and greater support from parents in enabling this will no doubt address the school based issue somewhat...
    
    and finally dare i say this, but as someone who was bullyed for many years during childhood, i to some degree am thankful for this, without these hurdels i doubt i would have developed the skills and resilency i have today, and i would not have been shaped into the adult im happy to be now, life presents expereices, whilst good or bad they present something for us to learn from - i too was bullyied in the workplace when i was a recent grad, but no doubt because of the skills id learnt through my school expereince i addressed this bullying quiet successfully....
    
    Its a horrible thing to happen at the time for these children and youth, but perhaps if those adults around them take the time to use these expereinces to foster the growth of positive life skills they will be much better people in the future because of it

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • AJ:

    14 Nov 2008 5:20:37pm

    Acutally I think the workplace bullying is a good parallel, whilst there is an element of individual responsibility, it is the organisation that protects and in some cases fosters the bullies (or psychopaths as I prefer to call them).

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

• Aldaron:

  14 Nov 2008 1:02:41pm

  The problem is not that schools don't address bullying, it's that they address it in such ineffective ways.
  
  My son has had a lot of trouble with bullies at his school. He has several belt-levels in karate, but is not allowed to defend himself - even just *blocking* an attacker's punches has left him suffering the same penalties for fighting.
  
  So he is unable to defend himself, but the school seems to not care about defending him. The punishment for bullying? A letter home to parents, requiring them to acknowledge their child has been a bully.
  
  Last week, when they were doing la crosse for school sport, my son commented to one of his friends: "I think la crosse sucks." The punishment for this? A letter home to me, requiring me to acknowledge my child had "disrespected the sports teacher."
  
  So the school is saying to me that my son expressing an opinion is in the same class as someone kicking the crap out of my son.
  
  And they wonder why I'm sending him to a private school next year when he starts Year 7...

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Jo:

    14 Nov 2008 3:17:02pm

    Aldaron, you'd better check your private school's policy, because some expel or suspend students who are in fights regardless of whether or not it is self defence. Your son's blocking tactic might land him the same punishment as the bully gets.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • Aldaron:

      14 Nov 2008 8:48:40pm

      Jo,
      Thanks for the suggestion. I've talked it over with the principal, and he said he doesn't have a problem with a child defending himself if someone attacks.
      
      His words were: "We use the same standard as society; a child is entitled to use reasonable force to defend himself or herself"
      
      So I'm pretty comfortable with that...

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • VC:

    14 Nov 2008 5:21:43pm

    Sounds like the teachers at the school are bullies themselves and just fostering the culture of harassment.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

• Ivan :

  14 Nov 2008 1:03:17pm

  "Parents are not liable for the actions of their children"
  
  Thanks for that little gem Chalkie - dead right - they are not.
  
  But they should be.
  
  I work in a gaol (at times) as a clinical nurse - guess where most of the bullies end up?
  
  But what they do not know is that a very effective pecking order awaits them once they are hauled off the streets into Her Majesty's Accommodation.
  
  In France the parents ARE now liable for their offspring's behaviou and crimes ... until they are no longer classed as minors.
  
  My point is that we should NOT have to use teachers as the "bully police" - this should be returned to the parents who raised them to deal with - and the little darlings should not be allowed back into the school system until certain undertakings are committed to.

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • chalkie:

    15 Nov 2008 7:04:29am

    There are a number of places that make parents financially responsible for their children's crimes (and it usuallyis criminal acts - arson, theft etc).
    
    NZ, Canada, US and even Australia have these provisions. The US (California, speicifically) has $10 000 caps for crimes in schools, $25 000 in other places.
    
    The problem with suing kids for their misbehaviour is the possible problem of the kids having a lifeling debt. In California, kids can be liable for damage and inthe case of an arson by a 15 yo he was ordered to pay US$2m, with the debt continuing through life (it cannot be extinguished by bankruptcy).
    
    Not sure what the limits are here in Aus but do we really want to start treating children as fully formed moral creatures to be treated as adults? Sure, some progressive rolling out of adult expectations but do we want to overturn the entire basis of juvenile courts?

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

• Oz:

  14 Nov 2008 1:04:16pm

  You guys really have no idea how the mind of a bully works do you?
  
  Educate bullys? Please! They know full well what they are doing is wrong and possibly criminal, they just dont care.
  
  As far as bullying goes, especially outside school. Parents of the bullies should also be held more accountable. Maybe some massive fines could help!
  
  Being suspended from school was not something that worried alot of kids in school, nor some of their parents. Most of them couldn't wait to leave school as soon as they were old enough and ditched alot of classes anyways.
  
  Fines and criminal charges against the kids and their parents is more the way to go. Yes if teachers turn a blind eye to it they and the school are responsible but I wouldn't go as far to extending their juristiction over outside of school stuff where they cant really do anything about it.

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • AJ:

    14 Nov 2008 5:23:51pm

    Acutally this is very true. Often bullies can actually be classified as psychopaths. Part of this prognosis is that they have no regards for rules and more importantly they have no empathy for the feelings of others. Just telling them bullying is bad is actually quite ineffective. Generally they need to be identified and treated to avoid becoming fully blown criminals.

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

• tonyg:

  14 Nov 2008 1:04:30pm

  Bullying is hardwired in the brain. We are surrounded by manifestations of "the pecking order" from kids fighting over the last lolly to the Olympics.
  
  Controlling the level of aggression in the bullying, physical or not, is difficult.
  
  How do you teach a child that the order is OK in sport or business, but not interpersonals?

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

• poorvictim:

  14 Nov 2008 1:11:42pm

  I am old bald and fat according to a verbal spray from someone elses revolting school age example of why retrospective birth control is required.
  
  So can Jason please take me on as his client 'pro bono' to show the conviction of his self interested bleatings or does it have to be a text message calling me old, bald and fat?

  Agree (0) Alert moderator

  • Bullfrog:

    14 Nov 2008 1:50:40pm

    I'll bite at this one. There have already been cases where schools have been sued for not appropriately dealing with bullies.
    
    This piece is addressing a brave new world of cyber bullying on top of the established areas. Not in exclusion of. An addition.
    
    And yes, the child in question should be corrected, through whatever avenues are available. Cognitive behavioural therapy is one option, that has the benefit of addressing the root cause (eg why the brat's mind is screwed up), as well as discouraging the inappropriate response by otherwise limiting the brat's freedom (through detention etc).

    Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • Blurter:

      14 Nov 2008 2:25:47pm

      I am the parent of a child found to have "cyber-bullied" another child on a 3rd party's my-space page.
      
      I was initially dumbfounded when my child was suspended from school for his actions, but i have come to understand the very serious nature of this modern bullying.
      
      I am however, still a little shocked when it as explained to be by the school that teachers "trawled" these sites, initiated friendships and then reported on conversations between children in their care-I believe this to be a very dangerous initiative!

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • cyberswaggie:

        14 Nov 2008 3:29:56pm

        What happens if I am a parent who is a teacher? do I
        - "trawl" (if only I could post scary music here!!) the myspace sites of children in my care and be a potential threat to your percived ideal fantasy world, or
        
        -reneg on my parental responsibility to supervise my own children's activities?
        
        -forget maintaining professional and personal relationships developed over years.
        
        Heres an idea, drop literacy from school curriculum altogether and let children develop it online. Spend school time developing ethics and social skills and forget all this back to basics 3Rs nonsense.
        

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

    • Anth:

      14 Nov 2008 2:28:27pm

      Or by allowing the bullied kids to beat the snot out of the bullies, bullfrog. Back in the day, bullies could be corrected by corporal punishment. They punched someone, they got the cane, not some limp-wristed half hearted lecture about respecting other people.
      
      My son is under instructions that if another child hits him, he is to hit them back - just once - in the face, as hard as he can, before he finds a teacher and reports the event.
      
      Strangely enough, he's not bullied any more.

      Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • Cathy:

        14 Nov 2008 3:21:56pm

        But isn't it a sad world were a child has to physically harm another child to stop the bullying. My son had the same problem, constant bullying, his locker flooded with juice, uniforms torn, items stolen all until he held a bully over a stairwell and threatened to let go. My son was upset that he had to resort to this.
        
        The cyber bullying is a major problem as is SMS. They can not escape the bullying away from school. Parents have to accept that little Johnnie is not perfect and maybe responsible and not blame the school or the other child. Maybe if they were legally responsible for their childs actions they would take more interest and care that their perfect child was perfect.

        Agree (0) Alert moderator

      • Dean Pantio:

        14 Nov 2008 3:27:47pm

        Kids just need to harden up.

        Agree (0)