Bullying is a serious public health problem, with significant short- and long-term psychological consequences for both the targets and perpetrators of such behavior, and requires a commitment to developing preventive and interventional policies and practices that could make a tangible difference in the lives of many children, says a new report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
The
programs that appear most effective are those that promote a positive
school environment and combine social and emotional skill-building for
all students, with targeted interventions for those at greatest risk for
being involved in bullying. There is emerging research that widely
used zero-tolerance policies -- those that impose automatic suspension
or expulsion of students from school after one bullying incident -- are
not effective at curbing bullying or making schools safer and should be
discontinued. Instead, resources should be directed to evidence-based
policies and programs for bullying prevention in the United States.
Until
recently, most bullying typically occurred at school or other places
where children play or congregate, but an abundance of new technologies
has led to cyberbullying, through chat rooms, social media, and other
forms of digital communication. Although it is difficult to determine
the extent of bullying due to definitional and measurement
inconsistencies, bullying likely affects between 18 percent and 31
percent of children and youth, and the prevalence of cyberbullying
ranges from 7 percent to 15 percent. Estimates are even higher for
subgroups who are particularly vulnerable, such as individuals who have
disabilities, are obese, or are LGBT. In addition, children with fewer
same-ethnicity peers at school appear to be at greater risk for being
targets of bullying.
Adolescents
who are bullied experience a range of physical problems, including
sleep disturbances, gastrointestinal concerns, and headaches. Although
the full consequences of bullying on the brain are not yet understood
entirely, there are changes in the stress response systems associated
with being bullied that increase the risk of mental health problems,
including cognitive function and self-regulation of emotions. Being
bullied during childhood and adolescence has been linked to
psychological effects such as depression, anxiety, and alcohol and drug
abuse into adulthood.
Youth
who bully others are more likely to be depressed, engage in high-risk
activities such as theft and vandalism, and have adverse outcomes later
in life compared with those who do not bully, the report says. In
addition, individuals who bully others and are themselves bullied appear
to be at greatest risk for poor psychological and social outcomes.
Children involved in bullying as perpetrators, targets, or both are also
significantly more likely to contemplate or attempt suicide. However,
there is not enough evidence to conclude that bullying is a causal
factor in youth suicides. The committee that conducted the study and
wrote the report also examined the relationship between bullying and
school shootings, concluding that the data are unclear on the role of
bullying as a precipitating cause of these shootings.
Zero-tolerance
policies may lead to underreporting of bullying incidents because the
consequence is perceived as too harsh, the committee found. The effects
of school-based programs that involve all students regardless of their
risk for bullying or being bullied -- such as counselors or teachers
presenting strategies for responding to bullying -- appear to be
relatively modest. Multi-component programs that combine elements of
these programs along with more targeted interventions for youth at risk
of bullying or being bullied -- for example, teaching more intensive
social-emotional skills or de-escalation approaches -- appear to be most
effective at reducing bullying.
Families
play a critical role in bullying prevention by providing emotional
support to encourage disclosure of bullying incidents and by fostering
coping skills in their children, the report says. However, the role of
peers in bullying prevention as bystanders and as intervention program
leaders needs further research to determine the extent to which peer-led
programs are effective.
Laws
and policies have the potential to strengthen state and local efforts
to prevent, identify, and respond to bullying, the report says. Over
the past 15 years, all 50 states and the District of Columbia have
adopted or revised laws to address bullying, and all except Alaska
include cyberbullying in their statutes. The U.S. Department of
Education’s Office of Civil Rights, the state attorneys general, and
local education agencies should partner with researchers to collect data
on an ongoing basis on the efficacy and implementation of anti-bullying
laws and policies, in order to guide legislators who may amend existing
laws or create new ones.
Given
the varying use of the terms “bullying” and “peer victimization” in
research and practice, for this report, the committee used the current
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definition: Bullying is any
unwanted aggressive behavior(s) by another youth or group of youths who
are not siblings or current dating partners that involves an observed or
perceived power imbalance and is repeated multiple times or is highly
likely to be repeated, and bullying may inflict harm or distress on the
targeted youth including physical, psychological, social, or educational
harm. The departments of Education, Health and Human Services,
Justice, Agriculture, and Defense, and the Federal Trade Commission,
which are engaged in the Federal Partners in Bullying Prevention (FPBP)
interagency group, should foster use of a consistent definition of
bullying, the report says.
The
committee also recommended federal agencies work with relevant
stakeholders to sponsor the development, implementation, and evaluation
of evidence-based programs to address bullying behavior and bullying
prevention training for professionals and volunteers who work directly
with children and adolescents on a regular basis. In addition, social
media companies should partner with the FPBP Steering Committee to
adopt, implement, and evaluate on an ongoing basis policies and programs
for preventing, identifying, and responding to bullying on their
platforms and should publish their anti-bullying policies on their
websites.
The
agencies engaged in the FPBP interagency group should gather
longitudinal surveillance data on the prevalence of all forms of
bullying, including physical, verbal, relational, property, cyber, and
bias-based bullying, and the numbers of individuals involved in
bullying, including targets, perpetrators, and bystanders, in order to
have more uniform and accurate estimates of prevalence.
“Bullying
has long been tolerated as a rite of passage among children and
adolescents, but it has lasting negative consequences and cannot simply
be ignored,” said committee chair Frederick Rivara, Seattle Children’s
Hospital Guild Endowed Chair in Pediatric Research and professor of
pediatrics and epidemiology at the University of Washington. “This is a
pivotal time for bullying prevention, and while there is not a quick fix
or one-size-fits-all solution, the evidence clearly supports preventive
and interventional policy and practice.”
No comments:
Post a Comment