BULLIES ARE NOT LANSING'S PROBLEM TO SOLVE

On Thursday's front page the Grand Rapids Press broke the story that gasoline prices are cheaper in Indiana and Kentucky than here in River City!  Not only that, intrepid Press reporter, Ben Beversluis, told us where the cheapest gas was in Atlanta the day before.  OK.  Good stuff.  Another reason to renew that subscription.

Despite the banality of the front page, the Press did get it right on the editorial page.  No, I'm not pulling your leg.  In the lead editorial, the paper opposed the "anti-bullying" bill that the Michigan House of Representatives passed last week.  The proposed law defines bullying and mandates that schools adopt particular policies and procedures against it.  The Press called upon the Michigan State Senate to vote it down -- and that is exactly what the Senate should do.

The law would be a bad one for a number of reasons.  First is that schools already have policies against bullying.  If a school principal isn't enforcing that policy, that is a problem for the local school district not the state legislature to addess.  Second is that bullying is one of those things that you know it when you see it.  It's not tidily reduced to a litany of crimes against political correctness, as the Democratic authors of the bill have officially defined bullying.  It would elevate childish insults -- e.g., "You're so gay!" -- to high crimes while allowing the pettifoggers (i.e., parents and their lawyers who refuse to hold their little darlings responsible for any wrongdoing) to excuse cruelties that slip through the P.C. dragnet.  Third is that, by its very nature, this law would circumscribe the discretion of local officials to deal with a local problem.

As we have commented recently, discipline is a primary duty of school officials.  Without it, there can be no effective education of students.  While bullies are a reality most kids must learn to deal with, they cannot be permitted to be a serious disruption to a child's education and well-being.  When a bully's parents will not keep him or her in check, then school officials must have the flexibility to do so as the situation dictates up to expulsion if necessary.  An "anti-bullying" law mandated from on high in Lansing would eliminate that flexibility by ossifying what is a social process of discipline into a legal one, with all the obfuscating clutter of procedures, rights, and appeals that would ensure less rather than more is done to control schoolyard punks.

Comments

[beentheredonethat]

Another policy, another waste of time. You hit the nail on the head - the school districts all have policies, but if they aren't enforced they aren't worth the paper they are written on. There wouldn't be half the problems we have today within our schools if policies and procedures were adhered to. I guess it makes the powers that be feel good to make it look like they are addressing the issue but it does nothing unless they follow-up on it. Then when you do confront an administer about what the proper procedure is they act like they will take care of it and you never hear from them again. Take it from one who knows.

[The Executive Director]

Hi, Nancy.

Indeed, you do know, which is why it is always good to have your comment on these matters. A large part of the problem is the unwillingness of public school administrators to enforce discipline. The last thing we need to do is give them a complicated set of rules handed down on high from Lansing to give such administrators an excuse to do nothing because they are "hamstrung" by those rules.

Regards, Bill

[beentheredonethat]

Bill - My observations have been from both sides of the "table" and have been experienced by numerous other parents district wide. No doubt this lack of follow through of current policies and procedures has resulted in part of the loss of enrollment, which then lends us to another of the famous mantras of our fearless leaders - "we need more money". Having the government set policies for the school districts is an easy out for them in that they can just "wring their hands, show a compassionate look on their face and blame it on anyone else but themselves". I can just hear it now. My concern, like yours, is that there will be a "one size fits all" definition of bullying put into place and administrators state wide will use it as the norm. In reading the GRPS policy on "bullying" and from what I've seen and experienced in schools, a lot of this type of behavior is part of the "early courting" rituals. Will a student be punished only because he was attracted to another and "pulled her pigtail" or "teased" her? Who makes the call here? In today's world it will be the lawyer of the girl who spurned the attempts of her suitor. We've seen it in the headlines. Will staff be held to the same standards (I can guess the answer is no). I know of some teachers that are guilty of some of the tactics listed in the current bullying policy. We need to use a little (or a lot as it seems to be lacking quite a bit today)common sense in how we handle things. Look at the current policies on the books, evaluate the situation and then dispense the punishment as deemed fit - but then, that would make some have to actually think and do a little work. It's so much easier to put the blame on the faceless government.