The cyberbullying problem among teenagers is a burning issue that often cannot be dealt with by either teachers or parents. Young people feel safe and relaxed in the new information space, to which the older generation is not accustomed. The Internet is an excellent base for the free expression of many opinions, even the most unpopular ones. At the same time, feeling impunity, teenagers can sometimes put each other in danger and humiliation using defamatory photos or flamboyant hate speech.
Steps
Initially, such a problem should be solved within the school policy framework. Arizona schools stand guard over freedom of speech and are not obligated to protect humiliated students. However, given the child’s psyche, it is not always possible to solve such a complex topic exclusively in the legal field. The first step is to have a careful conversation with the student and an assessment by the school psychologist to ensure that there is a fright. The second step: the teacher should discuss the problem with the school administration if the psychologist confirms the unstable emotional state of the child. Only after a meeting with the administration (the third step), a group of teachers should call the offending student for a conversation. During the discussion, appeals to the Arizona Statute, as well as to the US Constitution, are allowed. At the beginning of the conversation (the fourth step), it is crucial to be ahead of the pupil and state that teachers know what arguments this student will operate on. The school psychologist is required to supervise the interview and may be joined by a lawyer who specializes in juvenile crime.
The Student’s Arguments
A nervous and defensive student may begin to manipulate, asking what exactly the girl’s fright is expressed and whether the teachers are sure that the offense was potent. In this way, he will doubt that his words had a severe impact, and he legally does not deserve detailed consideration. In terms of the school code, he can emphasize that he does not offend a girl at school. Consequently, she can attend classes, and her right to education is not violated. The most striking argument in defense will be that the first amendment to the US Constitution protects all people, including those who express their opinions emotionally, not hiding their disgust (Free speech, 2018). The student may point out that the US legal system is based on dispute and balance, so his opinion is valid. The last supposed argument will be the preparation for a young student’s life. People often interpret cyberbullying as teaching, hardening of the spirit, and preparation for the cruelties of adulthood.
Response
Based on the Revised Arizona Statute, teachers can make at least three arguments against an abusive student. The First Amendment does not protect acts of harassment because they are objectively unacceptable and leave the victim the right to complain. The student’s actions and words can be seen as harassment depending on the specific Facebook posts (Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 15-1866). The following argument may be a direct threat to life or health. If the bully’s words contain such a threat, this can be a reason for legal intervention since the victim of bullying becomes a literal victim of threats and promises of reprisal and harm. The last argument is interference in the girl’s personal life since the student attacked her page, which is unrelated to education and their school. Such an invasion is not socially significant and cannot be justified.
Conclusion
The issue of insults on the Internet should be resolved not only with the participation of lawyers when it comes to children and adolescents. It is essential to involve psychologists and specialists in victimology in this process. The abuser will protect himself through the First Amendment to the Constitution; however, under the Arizona Revised Statute, not all acts of free expression fall under its protection.
References
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 15-1866.
Free speech. (2018). ACLU of Arizona.