Best Methods to Stop Bullying in Schools

The principal and teachers at Sheila’s school were proud of their efforts to stop bullies.  They had a team, including a psychologist, to deal fairly with students accused of bullying. They were certain that:

1. Students became bullies because they’d been bullied at home.
2. Bullies had low self-esteem and weren’t aware of other ways of making friends.
3. Bullying was in retaliation for bad treatment and that if provocation decreased, so would bullying.
4. If other students stopped hurting the feelings of bullies, bullying would eventually stop.
5. Since bullying was not the fault of one person, negotiation and mediation, would eventually stop bullying.
6. The best way to stop bullying was through forgiveness, sympathy, compassion, understanding, education and compromise.

These educators were not going to let those poor, damaged kids who’d turned to bullying be harassed, taunted or abused, verbally or emotionally, or through unjust accusations.

What’s wrong with this picture?

For example, when Sheila finally had enough and complained that a clique of mean girls made disparaging remarks about her weight, hair, pimples and un-cool clothes, her teacher asked for proof.  Sheila could only offer her word against the girls who denied being mean to her.

Since there was no proof, and the accused clique was composed of popular girls, Sheila’s teacher told her that she didn’t believe those girls would act so mean and Sheila better watch her false accusations.  The teacher said that Sheila was probably jealous and maybe she should dress better, lose weight, make friends and avoid antagonizing the popular girls.

Sheila’s mother met with the teacher, principal and school psychologist.  They assured her that there was no evidence for Sheila’s accusations.  Then they asked many questions about Sheila’s home life and psychological state.  Maybe Sheila was going through something difficult at home.  Or maybe she was simply jealous and suffering from some teenage turmoil because she didn’t fit in.

They suggested that Sheila try to make friends with the popular girls – be nice to them, ask them what upset them and try to change that, give them friendship offerings, open her heart to them or turn the other cheek if she was misunderstanding what they said to her.  Maybe Sheila was simply too sensitive to the way high school girls naturally were.

They told accused clique of girls that Sheila had complained about them and encouraged them to be nice to her, despite her complaint.

Having been forewarned and directed at Sheila, but having no consequences to make them stop bullying, the accused girls escalated their attacks and got sneakier.  Sheila was subjected to daily barrages of hostility, venom and meanness.  When nothing happened to the clique, they got bolder and eventually beat Sheila up in the bathroom.

Unfortunately for them, a teacher happened to be in one of the stalls and heard the whole scene.

The school officials now initiated their program to stop bullies.

• They investigated to find out what Sheila had done to provoke the attack.
• They told Sheila’s parents to trust them.  They were working on the problem, but because of confidentiality issues, they couldn’t share what they were doing.
• They encouraged Sheila’s parents not to talk with the parents of the clique girls.
• They encouraged Sheila’s parents not to go to the media or to a lawyer.
• They assured Sheila’s parents that the quieter the issue was kept, the more likely there would be a rapid resolution to the situation.

The principal and therapist had Sheila meet with the girls to mediate the situation by themselves.  They told the girls that they thought the students could solve the hostility on their own and that Sheila was willing to compromise with them.

At that meeting, the girls pinched Sheila, punched her, pulled her hair and threatened her with worse after school.  Then they told the principal and therapist that they’d apologized and promised not to do anything if Sheila would treat them nicer, but that Sheila had called them names, insulted them and refused to compromise.

Over the next six months, the attacks on Sheila increased, and the principal and his staff kept trying to educate the bullies.  Subjected to repeated teasing, taunting, harassment and physical abuse during this time, Sheila’s inner demons emerged, she gained more weight, became morose and depressed, and often had suicidal thoughts.  Her confidence, self-esteem and grades plummeted.  She even went through a period of guilt, thinking that the way the girls treated her was, indeed, her fault.

It took a lot to overcome her sense of despair and defeat, activate her fighting spirit and help her recover a sense of purpose, determination and hope.

By the way, the truth of Sheila’s accusations was later verified because one of her narcissistic persecutors had proudly used her phone to record most of the attacks.

There were many early warning signs that could have alerted Sheila’s parents that school officials would do nothing to stop the bullying. There were:

• No school-wide program including parents to stop bullies.
• No training for teachers, administrators and other personnel (janitors and bus drivers) to recognize the early warning signs of overt, covert, verbal, emotional, physical and cyberbullying.
• No effort to monitor areas of the school where most bullying occurs.
• No proactive effort on the principal or teacher’s parts to look for bullying.
• No effort to gather proof before it dropped unexpectedly into their laps.
• No effort to keep Sheila’s complaint confidential.

I could say a lot about specific steps that the principal, teachers and therapist could and should have taken to protect Sheila.  But they were the kind of do-nothing administrators who eventually make the headlines.

However, for this article let’s focus on the assumptions these educators had that assured that they wouldn’t consider protecting Sheila effectively.

1. There are the ones listed at the beginning of this article.
2. These supposedly responsible authorities cared more about understanding, educating and forgiving the bullies than about protecting their target or about creating a safe environment at their school.
3. They thought that the feelings and confidentiality of the bullies were more important than Sheila’s pain.
4. They were willing to sacrifice Sheila for the sake of education and therapy on the bullies.

Almost every student at the school knew what was happening and recognized the accepted culture of bullying.  That’s why there were no witnesses; the students knew better than to risk their necks when they wouldn’t be protected by the adults.

As is usually the case, in a school in which bullies are not stopped, Sheila’s treatment was not an isolated case.  When Sheila’s parents made her situation public, many other parents came forward with reports of how their children had been bullied by other students and how the administrators had not protected them.  Even after many other cases surfaced, the principal and his staff maintained the same approach.

Only the results of extensive media publicity, a court case and the intervention of a district administrator changed the situation.  Actually, more publicity resulted in a faster resolution of the situation.

Obviously, I don’t think that education, compassion and therapy are the best methods of stopping bullying.  The best method is to stop the behavior:

1. Create an atmosphere in which bullying is not tolerated.
2. Remove bullies.
3. Protect targets; don’t convert them into victims.
4. Encourage witness to come forward, not to become bystanders.

Then we’ll see which bullies respond to education, compassion and therapy.

I won’t sacrifice the targets for the sake of the bullies.

For some examples, see the case studies in “How to Stop Bullies in Their Tracks” and “Parenting Bully-Proof Kids,” available fastest from this web site.

Since all tactics depend on the situation, expert coaching by phone or Skype helps.  We can design a plan that fits you and your situation.  And build your will and skill to carry it out effectively.

Should You Stop Bullies if You Feel Vindictive, Resentful?

Amy was raised to be a nice girl.  She had learned not to act if she felt angry or if she sensed any resentful or vindictive feelings within her.  When she held back because her motives weren’t pure enough, she became easy prey for her bullying brother. When they were middle-aged, her brother moved back to their small town after having been gone for 20 years.  He began spreading vicious lies and rumors about Amy.  He blackened her reputation around town and even manipulated their mother into believing that Amy had always been jealous of him and that’s why she would claim he was nasty to her.

It was all lies.  Actually, Amy had done a lot to help him and had ignored his attacks; she’d never been nasty.  He was a sneaky, narcissistic, abusive, covert bully.

But the more his poisonous words went unchallenged, the more people believed them.

Amy obsessed on what he was saying and what was happening.  She couldn’t sleep, she wallowed in negative self-talk, shame and guilt, and became grumpy and angry at her family and at work.  She got anxious and depressed.  She even contemplated suicide as a solution to her dilemma.

Amy had helped her brother so much and she couldn’t understand why he’d do these things.  She tried reasoning with him and in return he attacked her verbally, venting a lifetime’s hatred and jealousy on her.  He blamed her for all the problems in his life; all his troubles had been her fault.  He told her that she had only succeeded and had a wonderful family because she’d fooled them all and he was going to bring her down.  He wouldn’t listen to reason or any compromise she offered.

He accused her of being evil.  Her anger and desire to retaliate proved how bad she was.  Since she did feel angry, resentful and vindictive, maybe he was right and she was deluding herself by thinking she was a good person.

Finally, Amy was forced to reevaluate some beliefs she’d accepted when she was a child:

• Truth will out; good people will be justified.
• Turn the other cheek; follow the Golden Rule.
• Never act if your motives are impure; if you feel the slightest amount of anger, resentment or vindictiveness.

When she could see that the wonderful life she’d created and her teenage children’s happiness were threatened, she broke free from her old rules and roles.  She evaluated those old rules-roles as an adult with much more experience than she had when she was a child.

She could see where and when the old rules might apply, and where and when she needed new rules because she was now a responsible adult.  She realized that her most important jobs were to protect her children, her marriage and her reputation.  She felt like her old skin had been ripped open and a new sense of clarity, urgency and power filled her new skin.

She told her teenage children what she’d realized.  She’d told them secrets about her brother that she’d hidden because she didn’t want them to know how rotten he’d always been.  But she had to protect her family from someone who’d destroy it, even though he was her brother.

She told their mother the truth, even though that hurt mom.  Her mother had always tried to ignore how bad her son had been.  Now she had a choice, face the truth and side with her daughter, who’d always been good to her, or continue siding with a son who was weak and manipulative.

Amy told the truth to her friends and many of the important people in town. The hardest part for her was to overcome her reluctance and produce evidence for many of the rotten things her brother had done while he’d been gone.  There were newspaper clippings to back up what she said.

Also, she reminded people to judge by character and history.  How had she behaved to them over the years: had she lied, deceived or harmed them?  Or had she always been kindly, considerate and truthful?

Her brother had to leave town.  Amy felt sorry for him, but she knew that her responsibilities were more important that her sympathy for her brother, who was now reaping the painful harvest of the seeds he’d sown.

Most important, she had a much better sense of what she had to do to fulfill her responsibilities and that she wouldn’t allow her feelings to put her in harm’s way.  Also, she saw that she had not let herself be overwhelmed by anger or resentment.  She hadn’t blown up and lost her character or the respect of the people in town.  Instead, she had stayed calm and thoughtful, and developed a plan that succeeded.

Now, she’s much stronger, courageous and determined.

Expert coaching by phone or Skype helps.  We can design a plan that fits you and your situation.  And build your will and skill to carry it out effectively.

Atlanta Teachers Cheat - Blame the Tests

Weaklings and whiners blame temptation and tempters.  That pattern of good reasons, best of intentions, and pathetic excuses and justifications to blame someone else is as old as apples and temptation.  It’s just as lame and weak now as it always was. According to Wall Street Journal articles, Beverly Hall was Superintendant of the Atlanta Public School District when at least 178 teachers have been accused of cheating to elevate student’s test scores en masse.  Administrators were also accused of “impeding the investigation, tampering with tests and intimidating teachers.”

Already, “82 of the 178 teachers and administrators implicated admitted to cheating.”  No examples of such cheating were found in rural schools.  Ms. Hall’s role is not yet clear.  The vast majority of Georgia teachers resisted the temptation to cheat and lie.

According to Kyle Wingfield, reporting for the Journal, “Many politicians and teachers have responded to the report by blaming the test and accountability measures like No Child Left Behind. This is exactly the wrong reaction: Atlanta shows us why public schools need more, not fewer, accountability measures.”  I agree.

Interim School District Superintendant Erroll Davis Jr. is cleaning house.  “At the same time, a former Atlanta deputy superintendent [Beverly Hall] agreed to go on paid leave from a Texas school district that hired her earlier this year.”

The dust will take a long time to settle.  I hope Ms. Hall’s lieutenants and all the other teachers involved spend time in prison and then find jobs in which they will not held out as role models to children trying to better themselves.  We count on teachers to be role models; to demonstrate the highest standards.

Let’s keep the focus on the overall issue – the reasons, excuses and justifications; the whining, complaining and blaming of bullies, abusers and criminals who want to blame temptation, not themselves.

The problem is not the “No Child Left Behind” mandate or standardized tests – although those aren’t perfect.

The problem is in individual humans who fail, who fall short of the standards they promised to uphold and then want to be left off the hook – no consequences, no punishment.

They used to say, “The Devil made me do it.  I had good reasons.  It’s not my fault and, therefore, I shouldn’t have to suffer.”  Now they say, “Society, the bad rules or system, too much pressure, my bad genes, my bad brain chemistry, my bad upbringing and childhood made me do it.  It’s not my fault, I’m a victim and, therefore, I shouldn’t have to suffer.”

Those are the same excuse used by men and women who bully, batter, control and abuse their dates or spouses.  They say, “It’s your fault I’m bullying you.  I can’t help myself.  It’s not my fault.”

Instead, let’s champion individual responsibility in the face of temptation – like all those teachers who resisted temptation.  All through history, in every culture at every time, temptation has been acknowledged as a fact of life.  And the need to overcome that temptation has been emphasized.  Of course we know we won’t always succeed.  Some temptations must be avoided in the beginning because we know once we start down a path; we won’t be able to turn back.

The fault is squarely on the heads and hearts of the elites who did not resist the temptation or report the weaklings who hurt all the students in their care.  The superintendent, the administrators and the teachers who colluded individually and en masse at cheating parties; the people who failed to fulfill their promise as keepers of children’s futures.

Lord Acton said, “absolute power corrupts absolutely,” as if it’s a foregone conclusion and we’re simply too weak to resist.

But Peter Parker’s uncle said, “With great power comes great responsibility.”  Like Spiderman, we all have to rise to our responsibilities.

Stopping School Bullies Requires More than Laws, Policies

State laws and school policies are necessary, but they’re not enough to stop school bullies.  The third necessary ingredient is the responsible people who are paid to make schools safe.  If teachers, psychologists and counselors, assistant principals, principals, district administrators and school board members don’t create effective school programs and don’t enforce the laws and policies, perpetrators will be freed and their targets will be victimized. According to the ABC News and investigative reporter Theresa Marchetta, Caitlin Smith was sexually assaulted in the final days of a summer program for incoming freshman at Englewood High School in a Denver, Colorado suburb.  The evidence seemed clear-cut and, indeed, a court recently found the boy guilty of unlawful sexual contact with no consent.

The school had suspended him for the last three days of the summer program but what happened when school started in the fall?

The story is titled, “District Policies Fail Teen Victim: Guilty Attacker Remains in School.”

In summary, the victim was ostracized and the perpetrator was allowed to roam free.

• In order for Caitlin to be allowed to enter school, the vice principal had the Smiths sign a “No-Contact Notice” which reads, "You have been involved in an incident that may be criminal in nature," and suspects can not "harass, threaten, annoy, disturb, follow or have verbal/physical contact with any victim or witness in this incident.”
• The perpetrator was immediately allowed back in school with Caitlin in the fall.  He did not sign a No-Contact Notice and was still allowed back in school.  This is despite a statement by Englewood Superintendent Sean McDaniel that, "I think that [the No-Contact Notice] would be a piece on the perpetrators side not on the victim’s side."
• On Caitlin’s first day back in school, she was taken right back to the scene of the attack.  "They guaranteed they wouldn’t take me down that hallway. I was freaking out, crying, upset.  I didn’t want to go through, was closing my eyes,” she said.  School authorities asked Caitlin’s mother to keep her daughter out of school.  She reports that, "They're asking me to hold my daughter out of school and giving an education to a child [the bully] who shouldn't even be there."
• To deal with such incidents, the Englewood School District has policies “which clearly states, multiple times, what happened to Caitlin was a ‘level one’ offense, ‘those which will result automatically in a request for expulsion to the superintendent.’”
• When Marchetta asked Superintendent McDaniel, “Should a student be expelled or consider being expelled for having unwanted sexual contact with a student?" he replied, "Absolutely, no question.  Sexual contact?  I would expect an administrator to suspend with a recommendation for expulsion.  Then, that would land in my office.”  But he then admitted that the perpetrator was allowed to remain in school without even signing the No-Contact Notice and that now, over six months after the incident, he didn’t know what the principal was doing about the situation.
• When Superintendent McDaniel was asked, “theoretically speaking, if it would ever be acceptable for a student accused of committing such an offense to remain in the population during the proceedings, he answered, ‘That’s a great question.  No,’ [he added], ‘In that scenario to just to turn the kid loose back in to the student population with no requirements, parameters?  No, I can not foresee a situation like that.’"  But he then admitted that the perpetrator was allowed to remain in school without even signing the No-Contact Notice.

Parents and students need to know what to do after such an incident:

• Don’t hide; make a fuss.  Immediately go to the appropriate school authorities and the police.  That’s like we encourage victims to report rape immediately.
• Don’t stop at being polite, sweet and docile; at being a “good girl.”  Immediately, find out what the school policies and state laws are.  Ask for what you need and be prepared with consequences for authorities who won’t act.
• Find and rally other students and parents who have been harassed, bullied or abused – emotionally, sexually or physically.  If any other kids excuse the perpetrator’s behavior and tell you that you’re being too harsh or if any other kids hassle, threaten or bully you, report them.  Record evidence; that’s what cell phones are for.  Travel with your friends.
• Give the school principal, therapist, district administrator and school board members one chance to act strongly.  Do they rally other students to protect you?  Do they deal swiftly with friends of the bully who harass you?  Don’t be put off by stalling tactics.  Be strong, brave and firm.  Read “Parenting Bully-Proof Kids.”
• If the authorities won’t act, immediately get a lawyer skilled in both the pertinent laws and in how to bring media pressure to bear.  Plan an overall strategy and tactics.
• Get an expert coach or therapist to keep your spirits up and to rally your strength and determination.
• Don’t accept bullying; don’t take the blame.  In most cases the girl is not a “slut” or “whore” that others will call you.  It’s usually not your fault.  You should know that if the school authorities won’t act, they’re the problem, not you.  You don’t have to be perfect according to their standards in order for them to actively help you.  Don’t indulge in self-bullying.  Negative self-talk, blame, shame and guilt never help.  They only increase anxiety, stress and depression, and destroy confidence and self-esteem.  Don’t believe negative predictions; your life isn’t ruined and in 10 years you won’t want to be friends with your high school classmates – certainly not the hyenas who pile on.

Isn’t it amazing that this happened in a Denver suburb near where the Columbine High School shootings occurred?

As you can see, state laws and school policies are necessary to give principals and administrators the leverage to act safely without fear of law suits by bullying parents of school bullies.  But the responsible authorities must be willing to act courageously, energetically, skillfully and effectively.  When they don’t, laws and policies become scraps of paper, blowing in the wind of their excuses.

Since the principal and district administrator didn’t protect a target of such bullying and abuse, I predict that there have already been other incidents at Englewood High School and there will be in the future.  Bullies are predators.  They look for easy prey and they push the boundaries.  Once one hyena gets away with boundary pushing – darting in, ripping off some flesh and darting back safely – the rest of the pack will pile on.

In addition to the perpetrator and his family, the principal and district administrator have a lot to answer for.  I hope a public outcry focuses on them.

Lori Drew Acquitted by Judge in Cyber Bullying Suicide Case

On July 2, a federal judge overturned guilty verdicts rendered by the jury against Lori Drew, 50, who was accused of participating in a cyber bullying scheme against 13-year-old Megan Meier, who later committed suicide. This case demonstrates why we need federal laws to stop cyber bullying, harassment and abuse.

The facts in the case were agreed upon even by Drew.  She set-up a MySpace account under an assumed name, “Josh Evans,” that was used by her daughter and an employee to harass, bully and abuse 13-year-old Megan Meier.  It is not clear what other actions Drew took to use or promote the use of the site.  After many attacks on Megan, the fake identity eventually encouraged her to commit suicide.  The three perpetrators would not admit who sent that message.

While that sounds straightforward and obviously wrong, and most people react with outrage, there are no Federal laws to prevent such attacks.  Since there are no laws making the cyber bullying, harassment and abusive actions of Lori Drew, her daughter and her employee a felony, prosecutors had to bring weak charges based on unauthorized computer access under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

Despite difficulties in stretching the application of these laws to cover the cyber bullying, a jury found Lori Drew guilty of three misdemeanor counts in the case.  However, the judge overturned the jury and acquitted Drew of the charges.  Some of the arguments for the defense were: * The three bullies didn’t know the terms of agreement for setting up their MySpace account because they hadn’t read the MySpace contract they agreed to. * Stretching the laws to cover their actions could set dangerous legal precedents.

Even though we can follow the legal arguments, the sense of outrage still remains.

This situation makes an obvious case for the need for strong Federal anti-cyber bullying laws. If there were clear laws and stiff penalties against, for example, using sites to defame, embarrass, harm, abuse, threaten, slander or harass third parties the case against the three people would have been different.  In addition, we must not offer people anonymity or secret identities to attack other people online.

Of course these laws would infringe on free speech and some people’s desires to create secret identities online.  Which is more important, protecting adults and children against anonymous attacks or free speech?

In the case of the suicide of Megan Meier, had Lori Drew’s daughter accosted Megan in person, laying forth whatever complaints she had, saying whatever vindictive and nasty things she wanted to say, the situation would have been very different.  Megan would have been able to face her accuser.  She would have known her accuser’s personal agenda.  She could have argued or ignored the attacks.  But online attacks through a false identity are a very different matter.

Of course lawyers debate legal precedents.  But we all know the protection we’d want against anonymous people who put signs or graffiti on our homes or burn crosses on our lawns.  We clearly see the need to regulate these actions, even if they aren’t direct attacks with a deadly weapon.  Cyber bullying, harassment and abuse require the same regulation.

Lori Drew and her attorney are trying to drum up sympathy for her.  They say that she’s had to pay legal fees and move from Missouri due to the publicity and anger her family has faced.  They may not have envisioned the final consequences of their hoax, but once we go down the pathway of harassment, bullying and abuse, we can’t control the results.

As parents, this case also should make us question our children’s use of social networking sites like MySpace.  I always recommend drawing firm lines that encourage face-to-face friends and prohibit virtual friends, who, by definition, aren’t real friends.

Facebook Cyber Bullying Lawsuit Versus New York Teenager

As reported by Reid Epstein in Newsday, New York teenager, Denise Finkel has sued Facebook for $3 million because, she claims, it carried a fictitious Facebook chat group to bully, ostracize, ridicule, abuse and disgrace her.  The lawsuit states that former high school classmates, Michael Dauber, Jeffrey Schwartz, Leah Herz, and Melinda Danowitz created the chat room in which they falsely claimed that she had “inappropriate conduct with animals,” and had AIDS, as well as other sexually transmitted diseases. I want to focus on two related areas that I think are more important in the long run.

Of course there will be a lot of furor over whether any or all of the accused four did it and whether Facebook is liable for content that’s not obviously pornographic.  Did Finkel complain to Facebook and did Facebook turn a deaf ear to Finkel’s complaints?  And are the four people guilty as accused?

The first area that I think is more important in the long run is the ongoing effort to make new laws in response to new crimes, especially using new technology.  The natural way that we make new laws begins when some people commit acts not specifically covered under the old laws that have terrible consequences.  We respond by specifically labeling those new actions as crimes, and attach what we feel are appropriate criminal penalties.  Then we see, by trial-and-error, where to draw better lines.  The legal system is inevitably slow, inefficient and never perfect.

Given the increasing number of lives ruined by cyber bullying, emotional harassment and abuse, especially in schools, and the number of suicides stimulated by cyber bullying, I think that our society will make laws specifically stating that false and malicious statements and postings, in addition to pornography, are illegal.  I don’t think we’ll hold carriers like Facebook, MySpace, etc. liable for their postings.  But I think we’ll hold them liable for ignoring complaints about specific chat groups and postings that they continue to carry.

Many states and school districts, including Kansas, Oregon and California are considering such laws to protect children and teenagers from cyber bullying.

One stumbling block in making such laws is where to draw the lines and the hidden assumption that cyberbullying laws can and should be made “just right” for all situations – never too lax, never too harsh.  But the letter of the laws can never cover all situations with “just right” justice.  We always depend on human wisdom in the law’s application to specific situations.  That’s just the way it is – for better or for worse.

And I think that in this area, safety should triumph over cyber freedom.

The second area that I think is more important in the long run is parenting for the specific situations involving our kids and teenagers.  Our job is to monitor our children:

1. Do they look like they’re having a hard time (maybe being attacked by cyberbullies)?  How can we help them stop bullying on their own or do we need to intervene?
2. Are they witnessing cyber bullying and are they struggling to know whether or how to intervene?
3. Are they cyber bullies?  How do we stop them and help them develop the character to make amends and do better next time?
4. Should they even be on MySpace or Facebook or any social networking sites?  What else would be a better use of their time and energy?

And of course there are no easy answers.  No one is really dumb enough to think there are easy solutions.

There are no safe environments.  Schools and the real world have never been safe.  Schools and social networks are testing grounds for the real world.  And the real world is not and should not be safe.  Facing risks and danger helps us develop good sense, good character and the qualities necessary to survive.  Imagine growing up on a farm, in a wilderness village or in the middle ages.  Not safe.  I grew up in New York City.  Not safe.  Millennia ago we had to learn what a saber-toothed tiger’s foot prints looked like and how long ago they were left.  The world still requires survival skills, even if different ones.

Our job as parents is to teach our children the skills and grit to survive in whichever jungle or battleground they live, and to protect them when they’re over-matched.

For practical, real-world tactics designed to stop school bullies and bullying, please see “How to Stop Bullies in Their Tracks,” and “Parenting Bully-Proof Kids.”  Individualized coaching can design action plans to fit your specific situation.  Also, the strong and clear voice of an outside speaker can empower principals, teachers and other students to stop bullying and abuse.