Cormier v. Town of Lynn, 479 Mass. 35 (2018) Although a defendant city “could and should have done more” to protect a student from bullying and its inaction resulted in serious injury to the child during a bullying incident, the measure prohibits prosecution. The Tort Claims Act will sue the city and its employees if they did not “initially” cause the situation. A website maintained by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services www.stopbullying.gov (c) creates a hostile environment in the school for the target; Yes. The law specifically prohibits retaliation against a person who reports harassment or provides information during an investigation, or “who has reliable information about bullying” (which seems to protect even a person who says nothing from retaliation). Paragraph 5(b). The law only says that it prohibits retaliation – it does not provide any other information (no procedure, no appeal, no definition, etc.). The Authority of Massachusetts Educators to Combat Bullying, Cyberbullying, and Sexting on and off School Grounds: The Interface Between the School Disciplinary Code and the Criminal Justice System, by Patrick Michael Rogers. Commonwealth Police Service, 2010. The Key Elements Framework used in the analysis of state laws is based on the review of legislation presented in the Analysis of State Bullying Laws and Policies – December 2011 (U.S.
Department of Education). In 2002, before focusing on bullying, Massachusetts criminalized the reckless endangerment of children under the age of 18. Notably, Section 13L of Chapter 265 of the General Laws of Massachusetts punishes any person who “willfully or recklessly engages in conduct that poses a substantial risk of serious bodily harm or sexual abuse of a child, or wilfully or recklessly fails to take reasonable steps to mitigate that risk where there is a duty to act.” Acts or omissions are “unjustified” or “reckless” if the person “is aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk and is deliberately unaware that his or her acts or omissions involving an obligation to act would result in serious bodily harm or sexual abuse of a child.” Therefore, school officials must take action or be prosecuted if they know that a child is at significant risk of sexual abuse or other serious bodily harm. Such circumstances may occur, for example, when a school allows a student to board a bus with a drunk driver, puts a child in contact with a known sex offender, or fails to stop bullying involving physical abuse. While Massachusetts is the first state to pass such a comprehensive anti-bullying law, other states are likely to take note and consider similar laws. The Anti-Bullying Act also prohibits reprisals against individuals who report bullying, provide information during a bullying investigation, witness or have reliable information about bullying. What happens if teachers or staff learn of an incident of bullying? Model Mobbing Prevention and Response Plan under M.G.L. c. 71, § 37O, Mass. Dept. “We recommend that districts and schools use this plan template as a template to develop their own plans that align with their individual school climate initiatives and needs.” The model plan is available in PDF and Word format. Who is responsible for implementing the bullying prevention plan? (b) knowingly impersonate anyone other than the author of the content or messages posted, if the creation or imitation creates any of the conditions of bullying (a) to (e).
Public and private schools must comply with strict new obligations in planning, training, notification, reporting and investigation. The cornerstone is a written plan to prevent and respond to bullying. The deadline for a bullying prevention plan is 31 years. December 2010, but schools should act now, especially as plans must be developed in consultation with many stakeholders, including teachers, school staff, professional support staff, school volunteers, administrators, community representatives, local law enforcement, students, parents and guardians. Plans must be updated every two years and include at least the following: Doe by and through Doe v. Hopkinton Public Schools, 490 F.Supp.3d 448 (D. Mass. Neither the school district`s anti-bullying policy nor Massachusetts` anti-bullying law, which prohibited repeated speech or behavior toward victims that caused physical or emotional harm, or violated the victim`s educational rights, were in fact overly broad and violated the First Amendment, without demonstrating that the policy or law prohibited a significant amount of protected speech or behavior.
prohibition. a provision that subjects students to disciplinary action if they knowingly make false accusations of bullying and reprisal; In addition, any plan must recognize that some students are more vulnerable to discriminatory bullying and harassment and include specific measures to support these students. The plan should also include professional development for school staff to prevent, detect and respond to bullying. Staff should be trained annually according to their respective school plan. In addition, the plan must be distributed to students, parents and school staff in the languages most spoken by students, parents or guardians. It must also be published on the school`s website. M.G.L Kap. 71 pp. 37O.
School Law in Massachusetts, by Rhoda E. Schneider, MCLE loose-leaf. Provides an example of an anti-bullying policy for schools in Chapter 8 MCLE, 3rd edition. StopBullying.gov provides information from various government agencies on what bullying is, what cyberbullying is, who is at risk, and how to prevent and respond to bullying, and includes government guidance. As of May 3, 2010, the client or agent must immediately investigate upon receipt of a report of harassment or reprisal. If the principal or officer determines that intimidation or reprisal has occurred, the mandator or officer must: (1) notify local law enforcement if the mandator or officer believes criminal charges may be prosecuted; (2) take appropriate disciplinary measures; (3) notify the offender`s parents; and (4) notify the victim`s parents and, to the extent consistent with federal and state law, inform them of the steps taken to prevent further bullying or retaliation. Two high-profile student suicides in Massachusetts have highlighted the devastating effects of bullying on schoolchildren. On April 6, 2009, an 11-year-old boy, Carl Joseph Walker-Hoover, hanged himself after being relentlessly bullied and called a homosexual at school. Fifteen-year-old Phoebe Prince hanged herself on September 14.
In January 2010, after being bullied at school and online, in part because of a relationship she had with a popular boy. In both cases, the schools would have been aware of the bullying, but did not do enough to stop it. Each principal or person in a comparable position is responsible for implementing and monitoring the plan. inform the victim`s parents or guardians of the investigation and disciplinary action taken, to the extent permitted by federal and state privacy laws; Any public, private, charter or residential school must work with parents, students, teachers, local law enforcement and community representatives to create a bullying prevention and intervention plan. The plan must include: Visit the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education`s “Bullying Prevention and Intervention” website and/or review the Massachusetts State Bullying Prevention and Intervention Plan on Bullying and Harassment. Recommandations de l’examen des lois sur l’intimidation du Massachusetts: Rapport à la Cour générale du Massachusetts. Commonwealth of Massachusetts Commission to Review Statutes Relation to Implementation of the School Bullying Law, juin 2011.