Things to Think About When
Structuring Your Definitions and Scope.
Note that in defining “bullying” the model policy from the Florida
Department of Education requires:
- · Systematic and chronic conduct
- · Unwanted and repeated
- · Severe and pervasive
The problem with requiring chronic, repeated and pervasive conduct
before the policy kicks in is that it ignores the two different ways conduct
arises to harassment.
A one time threat is sufficient to constitute harassment,
especially if it is a threat of bodily harm or property damage. Lesser attacks
may have to be repeated to constitute harassment, especially if they fall into
the “you are fat, disgusting and stupid” categories.
One time threat of bodily
harm or harm to property and repeated insults, provocative statements, etc.
should be the threshold.
In addition, certain other one-time actions should
constitute cyberbullying for the purposes of school policies, such as
forwarding someone else’s naked image to destroy their reputation and posting
true facts designed to hurt a student or subject them to ridicule and possible
hate attacks (such as their health private information, STDs, sexual
preferences or activities).
The “chronic and repeated “requirements before a policy kicks in are
replicated around the US, but do a disservice to the problem. They are used to
avoid First Amendment and similar state constitutional conflicts, but are not
necessary if the policy is well-constructed to avoid constitutional
restrictions.
Parry Aftab has worked with leading constitutional scholars and
lawyers on model language that can be adopted to address the realities of
cyberbullying conduct and respect constitutional rights at the same time.
Keep
an eye on StopCyberbullying.org or updates to this StopCyberbullying Toolkit to
watch their progress.
