Should schools be allowed to punish off campus cyber bullying?
Debate Rounds (3)
The idea that parents should be responsible for their kids netiquette is entirely valid, however if taken into consideration the amount of time the kids of the cyber bullying age group spend at school vs with their parents, it can be concluded that events at school shape a child more than parenting.
Therefore, if the school is largely responsible for (however unknowingly) supporting this kind of behavior, it is necessary that they make amendments by following up the act with punishment.
If a student experiences hateful and inappropriate abuse online, or invasion of privacy, the task of getting up the next day and facing the people behind it is hard on its own. However, if teachers who claim they are there to help and support do nothing it becomes almost unbearable.
Furthermore, simply watching a few Dr. Phil episodes will confirm that parents of cyber bullies are often in denial, or will not accept charges or discipline their own children, as they haven't been educated about the issue as much as teachers and school counselors. To put the responsibility upon adults who don't know much about the issue is an irresponsible way to deal with the situation.
So in conclusion, schools should have every right to punish off campus cyber bullying.
Second there are other ways the school can deal with cyber bullying without invading students privacy and reaching outside their jurisdiction. They can offer counseling and therapy for kids affected by cyber bullying. They can notify the student's parents of their posts. They can even teach kids from a young age how to cope with bullying. The last one may not sound kind but think about it this way. Bullying will always be a part of life. The real world is not a nice place and you can't run home crying to mommy and daddy every time you get insulted. Rather than do the impossible and try to stop it. You should teach kids how to deal with it.
Third there is also something thing called the first amendment. The freedom of speech allows you to say what you want as long as it isn't threatening. Unfortunately, the freedom of speech does allow insults and criticism. If it didn't the government could do what it wanted and we all would be unable to protest against it. Personally I value my first amendment rights more than a few emotionally weak people's self esteem.
Finally, in addition to teaching kids how to cope with bullying they should learn how to safely use social media. They need to be taught how to report posts and block users. They should also learn to never accept friend requests from people they don't know and to never give out personal information. If kids were taught by the school and by their parents how to cope with bullying and safely use social media this wouldn't be such an issue and the school wouldn't have to invade people's privacy.
Firstly, the idea that schools can deal with cyber bullying by providing therapy and counseling is valid, however, it must be taken into account that not every child has the resources, time, and money for counseling. Therapists on average are about $85 per hour.
In my opinion, cyber-bullying should be prevented, although stopping it entirely is impossible, yet at the same time, kids should be taught how to cope with it. The issue should be addressed from both sides as to narrow the occurrences of cyber-bullying as much as possible.
The first amendment certainly allows freedom of speech as such, however I feel as though your argument here is, in a way, contradictory to your final argument: If kids should be taught to appropriately use social media, why shouldn't they be taught as well to appropriately and safely use the rights of their first amendment?
Personally, I know a large number of students who have experienced cyber-bullying in some form, and have a good deal of social netiquette and are conservative with giving out private information. This whittles down the blame to people the victim knows, more specifically, other students.
We cannot change parents, and force them to adapt a new way to raise their children. The 14th Amendment clearly states that no citizen will be denied privileges and/or immunities. Therefore, parents cannot be forced to change. However, schools still may be able to do so, as the law is intended for individual citizens, not state-based systems and unions.
A point I must have to agree with you on is that schools shouldn't be invading privacy. However, the simplest way to provide evidence for cyber-bullying without invading privacy to the point where it is irrelevant to the subject, is to take a screenshot. Following up with the previous argument regarding teaching children how to cope, children should also be taught to immediately take a screenshot, for proof and exact statements made by both parties. This way schools don't need to venture into internet history, IP addresses, and other personal information to search for the pieces of evidence that are appropriate to the situation.
The real world is certainly not a place for those who enjoy riding unicorns and eating rainbows. However, it becomes harder if a child has already been given messages of discouragement by peers. A way to strengthen children is for them to know that the school system has their back if cyber-bullying gets too serious. While I agree, kids can't run away from every situation crying to their parents or teachers, I believe that they will eventually have to learn to deal with these issues, and that if they don't, the "real world" will weed them out of success. Schools should still accept responsibility for actions done by students that threaten the social atmosphere, since school is where the unfriendly relationships that start cyber-bullying begin.
The dealing with cyber-bullying at school should not be limited to just punishment; the guidance counselor and teachers should be allowed to talk freely and in a non-judgmental way to both the victim and the bully. In the original debate statement "Should schools be allowed to punish off campus cyber bullying?", the word 'punish' is vaguely defined. Rather than obliterating all forms of punishment, an appropriate compromise should be made so that the bully receives punishment that does not largely take away from their privileges, while the victim is taught to deal with the situation appropriately should it occur again.
I'd like to thank you for creating this debate, by the way. It certainly has dwindled the rising anthill of summer boredom.
I don't know about your school but my school has guidance counselors and psychologists that you can see any time for free.
I agree that cyber bullying is wrong. But like we have agreed it is impossible to stop. That is why I think we should teach kids to cope with it. If kids knew how to cope with it then it wouldn't be such a big deal.
As for parents. What I meant when I said schools can show parents their child's posts was not that parents should be forced to raise their children in a new way. Sometimes parents don't realize that their child is cyber bullying and if the school showed them their child's posts they might take action. (taking away social media privileges) I realize some parents don't really care or may even support their child's behavior but some parents would stop their child from cyber bullying the moment they found out they were doing it.
I agree a way to strengthen children is for them to know the school system has their back. That is why i suggested using the school psychologists or getting therapy.
The school should not accept responsibility for actions taken by students outside of school. When you say it should just because the bad relationship that led to cyber bullying began there is like saying a super market should be responsible if two people meet there, get in a bad relationship, and one of them shoots the other an hour later somewhere else.
In conclusion I say that what happens at school is what the school can deal with and what happens outside the school is not their business. It is up to parents (should they choose to do so) and in some cases the law to deal with off campus cyber bullying.
Schools here also have guidance counselors that can be talked to for free, however, what is the point in talking to the counselor knowing that no changes will be made because the school is not allowed to punish off-campus cyber-bullying?
If schools are not able to do so, they are re-enforcing the message that cyber-bullying is not an issue, and that change is not required. Growing up in such an environment lacking support will cause the issue to grow.
Furthermore, if teachers don't pay attention to cyber bullying, parents will not feel motivated or obliged to do so, even if their child is the victim/bully.
I agree with the majority of your points, but still remain fixed on the opinion that schools should be able to punish off-campus cyber bullying if it is serious enough, and if the punishment is appropriate and is done without invading privacy.
Thanks so much for having this debate with me!! It's a relief to know that there are people here who still have relevant things to ponder, and are committed to the debate process.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by leonitus2464 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||3||0|
Reasons for voting decision: con had better point altogether that and pro said that she agreed with lots of cons points not all of them but most of them and while thats not concession its close.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.