Comments on: A Modest Proposal to Curb Bullying

By: Marc F. Bellemare

Marc F. Bellemare — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 13:39:21 +0000

Thanks, Christopher. This is very helpful. I agree that the law could be amended to allow directly dealing with this. My post was aimed more at what we can do short of amending the law. Please thank Cheryl for her input.

By: Marc F. Bellemare

Marc F. Bellemare — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 13:37:11 +0000

Thanks for your comment and question, Jacob. What I had in mind was that the doctrine of respondeat superior could be brought up in order to hold parents responsible of the relevant tort. In most cases, this would be harrassment (something which goes as far back as Wilkinson v. Downton), but in the Amanda Todd case, I guess it would be aiding and abetting suicide, if not manslaughter.

By: christopher

christopher — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 13:32:42 +0000

From my friend Cheryl, a lawyer: “[Cheryl L. Wickham] In a nutshell, I think it’s a dumb idea. First, the concept of making children less responsible for their actions upsets me. If anything, they should be held more accountable. One big issue with bullying is that unless the victim fights back the bully goes unpunished. Adding parent liability won’t really change anything. For another, bullying is complicated, which is why laws don’t really deal well with it. Take for instance the case mentioned, the cause of action here would be the tort of public exposure of private facts – which I might add doesn’t exist in every jurisdiction. Aside from that, there are not many causes of action present. Adding respondent superior adds nothing because you would need to show it was “at the direction” of the parents, which I’m sure is not true. At most you could argue “negligent supervision”. :/ The fact is, it really adds very little. But, I have a counterproposal…how about we give more “teeth” to privacy laws and stalking laws. Then people might think twice about breaking them. Privacy laws and stalking laws are both really weak in the U.S. This would help more, IMHO, and not just for bullying cases.

Looks like states have already started to do this: http://m.ncsl.org/issues-research/telecom/cyberstalking-and-cyberharassment-laws.aspx“

By: Jacob AG

Jacob AG — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 21:13:46 +0000

I’m not a lawyer, sorry, just a reader.

It’s an interesting idea, but it’s a bit broad. What are we talking about, specifically? In this case for example, what would the state hold parents accountable for exactly: bullying, manslaughter, or something else? (You can see how there’s a huge range of possible punishments…)

By: Janet Hou

Janet Hou — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 16:16:57 +0000

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-parenting/post/stop-bullying-campaign-asks-kids-to-stand-up-for-other-kids/2012/10/17/4e35e4e4-16e5-11e2-8792-cf5305eddf60_blog.html

This is an article from the Washington Post, posted on October 17th. The Ad Council is starting a new campaign that focuses on kids being an essential tool to combat bullying. It mentions the role of parents too and how this campaign isn’t a free pass for parents to sit back and say the kids and government are handling this issue. Which is just crazy that parents would think that in the first place but it seems as if parents want the fun part of being a parent and none of the “hard” or unpleasant ones, as in teaching and disciplining. Soapbox rant ended.