Bullies Need Therapy Not Punishment Essay Sample
Bullies are non born. fortunes make toughs. Therefore why can strong-arm non be helped to do them better grownups and have a brighter hereafter? Everyone needs to understand the causes of intimidation and seek to assist forestall it from the underlying cause. By penalizing a bully. does that stop the job of intimidation or consequence in more hatred and aggressiveness on portion of the bully? “Since toughs are made. non born. rehabilitation is an come-at-able and preferred option to fall backing to harsh rebukes or turning a blind eye” ( Hanson ) . Bullying is a signifier of young person force. It is an unwanted aggressive behavior by one or a group of immature individuals. It is usually repeated often and affects the individual physically. psychologically. socially. or educationally. Bullying can be in the signifier of physical. verbal or societal aggression. Another signifier of intimidation is cyber-bullying. which involves strong-arming through electronic mail. a chat room. instant messaging. a web site. text messaging. or pictures or images posted on web sites or sent through cell phones ( Understanding Bullying – Fact Sheet ) .
The first response to cover with a tough is usually to penalize them. They are regarded as a ruthless. emotionless and bad individual. who hurt others and hence they can non be helped. But most of the clip. those toughs do non even gain the impact their behaviors are holding on the victims. There are times when they have really been victims of strong-arming themselves and to them. this is a manner of venting their defeat out ( Hanson ) . A 3rd of toughs are victims of intimidation and those childs really are more prone to depression and self-destruction ( Smith-Heavenrich ) . Counselors and psychologists believe that bullies’ behaviors relate to their place environment. There may be a figure of factors like contending. penalty and a deficiency of congratulations and encouragement that make toughs think that this is the lone manner trade with jobs.
If non treated. toughs go on to hold unsuccessful relationships subsequently in life ; with their spouses. organizing or maintaining friendly relationships. or even forestalling struggles with colleagues ( Hanson ) . A research conducted on the lives of 518 persons. from the age of 8 until 50. shows that “the 1s labelled as toughs received more impulsive commendations and tribunal strong beliefs and showed higher rates of alcohol addiction and antisocial personality disorders” . In early classs. their intelligence degree were similar to that of other childs but by 19. the aggressiveness were a hinderance to the development of their rational accomplishments. In high schools. those toughs had higher dropout rates and were more involved in sex. drugs and intoxicant issues ( Smith-Heavenrich ) . Even groups from the American Bar Association and the American Psychological Association reported a lessening in academic public presentation and addition in misbehavior. school dropouts for kids who have been punished instead than helped ( Armistead ) . Therefore. instead than penalizing them. pedagogues and parents should assist toughs turn to their jobs so they can take a normal grownup life subsequently ( Hanson ) .
Another ground to assist toughs is for the interest of a safer society. Surveies have shown that toughs as kid have an association with condemnable behavior later in life. One survey in the United States showed that by the age of 30. one of four toughs have a condemnable record. compared to non-bullies. for whom it is a fifth of that. Bullies end up non holding a good work life excessively and hence do non lend much to the economic system of the society and on top of that. an addition in mental wellness services. accidents. tribunal costs and medical costs due to force is an extra cost to the society ( Hanson ) . Please note that harmonizing to Fight Crime: Invest in Kids. the cost for one twelvemonth of juvenile detainment per kid ranges from $ 35. 000 to $ 50. 000 compared to $ 12. 000 to $ 15. 000 for bar and intercession plans ( Armistead ) .
Therefore in the best involvement of everyone. it is better to supply aid to toughs from a immature age itself and assist them alternatively of penalizing them. Researchs are now demoing that toughs start going aggressive from an early age and they treat others in an unfriendly manner. They imagine there is aggravation while there is none and looks for retaliation ( Smith-Heavenrich ) . Bullies need to understand that aggression with worlds is non the redress to everything. Anger direction plans can assist toughs by placing what is doing them to respond that manner. This is a long term procedure. where a batch of forbearance is required. It is more good and less disputing if started every bit shortly as intimidation symptoms are get downing to be noticed in a kid. By assisting a bully trade with the psychological jobs they may be holding. half of the issue will be solved.
However. if merely punished. the bully’s head will be filled with even more hatred for the society ( Hanson ) . Parents of toughs need to be really unagitated and understanding. They have an of import function of learning the kid that strong-arming is non a portion of their household or society. They can get down by handling their childs with regard. They have to cognize how their kids are experiencing and what is doing that aggressiveness in them and assist them happen alternate ways to cover with those emotions ( Smith-Heavenrich ) . Another of import topographic point to forestall intimidation is at school. Alternatively of concentrating on one person. school broad instruction should be implemented to assist childs non go toughs. In South Carolina. McCormick Middle School used a plan that provided aid non merely to the victims but to toughs as good. After a twelvemonth. the strong-arming rate dropped from 50 % to 22 % ( Smith-Heavenrich ) .
Aggressive anti-bullying attempts may be a large menace to toughs. as they are invariably criticized. However. sometimes what is considered intimidation may merely hold been a normal portion of turning up. Harmonizing to NICHD study. we consider badgering or making awful things to a pupil as intimidation but when two pupils of the same strengths are contending. it is non considered intimidation ( Soskis ) . That is another ground why alternatively of penalizing person. presuming them to be a bully. we should seek to happen out what really happened. Taking terrible stairss for person who is non really a tough may do them develop a hate and so turn them into a bully.
Of class some may reason that authorising victims and penalizing toughs is the best manner to cut down intimidation ( Junyk ) . However. as stated in my treatment above. the nothing tolerance attack is non good. For illustration. one of the grounds stated for cyberbullying is namelessness ( Why do Peoples Cyberbully ) . Therefore. if a bully is punished at school. he/she may make up one’s mind to seek retaliation from the victim by usage of cyberbullying and thereby staying unidentified. This will be even more distressing to the victim.
So. it is high clip for people to recognize that merely by assisting victims. intimidation is non traveling to halt and it is non traveling to assist the society. Help must be readily available for toughs. so that they can confront whatever job they may be confronting and go a better and responsible citizen for the hereafter. By making so. there will be no more blustery and hence. no more victims excessively.
Armistead. Rhonda B. “Zero Tolerance Policies Are Unfair. ” Violent Children. Ed. Roman Espejo. Detroit: Greenhaven Press. 2010. At Issue. Rpt. from “Zero Tolerance: The School Woodshed. ” Education Week 11 June 2008: 24-26. Opposing Point of views in Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2014. Hanson. Ruth. “Point: Bullies Should Be Rehabilitated. Not Punished. ” Canadian Points of Position: Bullying ( 2014 ) : 2. Canadian Points of View Reference Centre. Web. 18 Oct. 2014. Junyk. Myra. “Counterpoint: Bullies Can Be Prevented by Empowering Victims. ” Canadian Points of Position: Bullying ( 2014 ) : 2. Canadian Points of View Reference Centre. Web. 18 Oct. 2014. Smith-Heavenrich. Sue. “Bullying Among Youths Is a Serious Problem. ” America’s Youth. Ed. Roman Espejo. San Diego: Greenhaven Press. 2003. Opposing Point of views. Rpt. from “Kids Aching Childs: Bullies in the Schoolyard. ” Mothering ( 2001 ) . Opposing Point of views in Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2014. Soskis. Benjamin. “The Extent of Bullying Is Exaggerated. ” America’s Youth. Ed. Roman Espejo. San Diego: Greenhaven Press. 2003. Opposing Point of views. Rpt. from “Bully Pulpit—How America Learned to Hate Bullies. ” The New Republic ( 14 May 2001 ) . Opposing Point of views in Context. Web. 29 Oct. 2014. “Understanding Bullying – Fact Sheet. ” n. d. Centers for Disease and Control Prevention. PDF Document. 20 October 2014. “Why Do Peoples Cyberbully? ” Delete Cyberbullying – A Stop Online Harassment Project. Delete Cyberbullying. n. d. Web. 20 Oct. 2014.