SWGA Politics

Are GA’s Bullying Laws Strong Enough?

State Rep Mike Jacobs genuinely doesn’t think so – but he wants to talk about it.

Currently, “bullying” is defined in the OCGA as:

(1) Any willful attempt or threat to inflict injury on another person, when accompanied by an apparent present ability to do so; or

(2) Any intentional display of force such as would give the victim reason to fear or expect immediate bodily harm.

Rep Jacobs, at the request of some of his constituents, would like to add a third part to the definition to state:

(3) Any intentional written, verbal, or physical act that:
(A) Physically harms another person or damages another person’s property;
(B) Has the effect of substantially interfering with a student’s education;
(C) Is so severe, persistent, or pervasive that it creates an intimidating or threatening educational environment; or
(D) Has the effect of substantially disrupting the orderly operation of the school, when such act occurs on school property, on school vehicles, or at school related functions or by use of data or software that is accessed through a computer, computer system, computer network, or other electronic technology of a local school system.

He would also like to strike down the requirement that school systems develop anti-bullying policies for middle school and high school and instead require anti-bullying policies for EVERY level. He would also give permission for a local school system to force a bully to go to another school within the system on the first instance of bullying.

Finally, he would like to require the State Department of Education to develop a model policy that includes:

(1) A statement prohibiting bullying;
(2) A requirement that any teacher or other school employee who has reliable information that would lead a reasonable person to suspect that someone is a target of bullying shall immediately report it to the school principal;
(3) A requirement that each school have a procedure for the school administration to promptly investigate in a timely manner and determine whether bullying has occurred;
(4) An identification of an age appropriate range of consequences for bullying;
(5) A procedure for a student, parent or guardian, teacher, or other school employee, either anonymously or in such person’s name, at such person’s option, to report or otherwise provide information on bullying activity;
(6) A requirement that a parent or guardian of any target of bullying or student who bullies another shall be notified; and
(7) A statement prohibiting retaliation following a report of bullying.

I have a few concerns with this, in no particular order here:

a) I actually think Rep Jacob’s new definition is a much tighter, more compact way of saying what is already said in the existing law. So why not strike the existing law and just use the newly proposed definition?
b) I’m concerned – and I told Rep Jacobs about this when we spoke about this bill recently – about expanding the bullying policies down to the elementary schools. Even in middle school and high school, bullying and horseplay can look extremely similar, and I would think this is even moreso with the younger kids. I only taught 6-12 though, so I’m honestly not sure there, just basing it on my own memories from that age and observing kids throughout life.
c) I’m also concerned about moving the bully to another school – particularly on the first offense. How would the kid be transported to the new school? Would he not simply continue his bullying ways at the new school? In other words, I’m concerned that you’re not changing his behavior by moving schools – just his target list. A lion is a lion, whether he be on the African Savannah or in Savannah GA.
d) Isn’t it already assumed that bullying is prohibited? Don’t we already teach kids both at home and in kindergarten to keep their hands and feet to themselves and don’t pick on other kids?
e) So we’re adding yet ANOTHER thing teachers can be disciplined for if they don’t report? I can name off the top of my head at least a handful of other such things already on the books, and I’m sure that there are quite a few I never bothered to even pay attention to long enough to learn I was supposed to be paying attention to them!
f) I actually think that within this framework, parts 3 and 4 of the model policy are good things. Investigations – particularly of things as transient as bullying – should be done swiftly, and consequences MUST be age appropriate. For example, I don’t think any of us want to see 5 year olds in the court system or even in an alternative school – both of which may be appropriate for a 15 year old.
g) I’m also concerned about privacy and due process with regards to part 5. “Anonymous tips” are absolutely ripe for abuse, particularly when the accused “bully” is not well-liked by students or parents or teachers or some combination thereof.
h) Do we honestly expect that parents don’t know their child is either a bully or a target of bullies? (part 6)
i) Again, shouldn’t retaliation of bullying not being allowed already be obvious? Do we really need to put it in the policy that you’re not allowed to bully your bully?

Rep Jacobs put his ideas out in the form of this bill, I’ve put mine out in the form of this post. What do y’all think?