New Jersey’s Anti-Bullying Law Not Tough Enough
Subscribe to our RSS Feed:
Topics
- New Jersey Employment Attorney Discusses 'Cat's Paw' Liability for Discrimination and Retaliation Claims
- New Jersey Employment and Civil Rights Lawyer Discusses Marriage Equality in New Jersey
- Employment Rights Lawyer Discusses 2011 National Business Ethics Survey 'Workplace Retaliation on the Rise'
- Consumer and Civil Rights Trial Lawyer Discusses Bill Prohibiting Attorney's Fees for 'Technical Violations of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act'
- Employment and Civil Rights Attorney Applauds Appointment of First Openly Gay Supreme Court Justice in New Jersey Bruce Harris
- Employment Rights Lawyer Discusses Arkansas' Supreme Court Declaration of Punitive Damages 'Cap' as Unconstitutional
- New Jersey Civil and Employment Rights Lawyer Discusses Penn State and Syracuse Sex Abuse Cases
- New Jersey Civil Rights Attorney Opposes Christie's Remarks About Judge Feinberg
- New Jersey Harassment Lawyer Discusses Gay Bashing Statements by Public School Teacher
- The Occupation of New York City - What it Means to You
- The End of 'Don't Ask Don't Tell'
- Justice is About More Than Money
- Proud to be an American
- The Steady Slide Toward Theocracy in the United States
- The 'Nullification' Amendment and the Destruction of America
- Honorable Republican Against Tort Reform
- Don't Change the Consumer Fraud Act
- New Jersey’s Anti-Bullying Law Not Tough Enough
- California Elects its First Transgendered Judge
- What I'm Thankful For
- The Beginning of The End For 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'
- No Compelled Defense Medical Exams in New Jersey Discrimination Cases
- Unfair Doesn't Mean Illegal
- Everyone vs. Everyone Why South Park’s Treatment of Sexual Harassment in Schools is no Joke
- The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is Unconstitutional
- 'Full Marriage Equality' Editorial
- Governor Christie Makes History By Politicizing the New Jersey Supreme Court
- School Bullying Results in 800000 Verdict
- Big Brother is Watching Civil Rights Abuses by Schools
- Illinois Supreme Court Overturns Damages Cap in Medical Malpractice Matters
- Why Arbitration Agreements Are Un-American
- It's Time to Pierce the Corporate Veil in Discrimination Cases
- Sexual Discrimination in Contractual Relationships
- The Truth About Who Files Lawsuits
- Of Free Speech vs. Hate Speech
- Plausibility and Common Sense DANGER
- I Didn't Sexually Harass Her But They Fired Me Anyway
- Why Mandatory Arbitration of Employment Claims Is Un-American
- New Jersey Considers Workplace Bullying Law
- Racial Harassment in Bergen County-Justice for Roberth Morales
- Third Circuit Rules It Is Illegal to Discriminate Against an Employee For Having an Abortion
- Courts Unfriendly to Employment Plaintiffs-Harvard Study
- Finally-Religious Based Harassment is Truly Illegal in New Jersey
- Corporate Greed
- Bigoted Pediatrician
- Governor Corzine Lets Down The People of New Jersey
- Racism in the Jury Box
- The McDonalds Myth
- Caps On Damages Dont Work
- A Rose By Any Other Name - Marriage
- What Workplace Harassment Says About Our Society
- The Road So Far
Recent Updates
February 22, 2012
New Jersey Employment Attorney Discusses 'Cat's Paw' Liability for Discrimination and Retaliation Claims
February 10, 2012
New Jersey Employment and Civil Rights Lawyer Discusses Marriage Equality in New Jersey
February 6, 2012
Employment Rights Lawyer Discusses 2011 National Business Ethics Survey 'Workplace Retaliation on the Rise'
February 1, 2012
Consumer and Civil Rights Trial Lawyer Discusses Bill Prohibiting Attorney's Fees for 'Technical Violations of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act'
January 25, 2012
Employment and Civil Rights Attorney Applauds Appointment of First Openly Gay Supreme Court Justice in New Jersey Bruce Harris
New Jersey’s Anti-Bullying Law Not Tough Enough
Posted by: Kevin Costello
Although I do applaud the legislators who have the courage, in a poor economy, to pass New Jersey's recently enacted "anti-bullying law," I'm sad to say that I think the same sort of political spin that often attends such "feel good" legislation is at work here. This law's been called the 'toughest' of its kind. In light of what it doesn't do, we need to redefine the 'tough.'
I make no apologies for the fact that my calling is to bring lawsuits on behalf of individuals who have been harmed in their civil or employment rights. My belief is that the only way you hold someone accountable for a wrong is to make them responsible for the consequences of that wrong. Simply telling people, by way of a legal 'slap on the wrist,' that they have done wrong, and they ought not do it again, does not work.
See my endless stream of anti-corporate, anti-right blog entries prior for more amplification on how important litigation is in ending fraud and civil rights abuses. I do not believe now, and never will believe, that corporations, public entities or anyone who is not personally at risk really learns from anything other than painfully, or that they modify their conduct for any other reason that they wish to avoid pain. Businesses and public entities are not people, and they have no consciences, despite their PR. People do. Sometimes.
Think about it--when you were a child, which lessons did you remember best? The ones that hurt. Human beings simply don't learn well with positive reinforcement, despite every talk show and every feel good psychologist who urges that that method works. The moments I remember most vividly in my childhood deterring certain conduct were the moments where I suffered emotional, physical, financial or other consequences. Embarrassment, Loss and Pain: These were the things that taught me lessons. Lawsuits are the civilized world's version of how to teach those lessons to people and to corporations and other entities without violence. Courts are the place in which painful lessons are taught.
Therefore, I'm always suspicious and critical of statutes which seem to create a new prohibition on conduct that we as a society want to prohibit - and all but the most psychotic of us want to prohibit harassment and bullying in schools - but which don't provide a remedy in the event that the prohibition doesn't take. This new anti-bullying law asks a good deal more from school entities and personnel about record keeping, standards, deterrence, investigation and prevention than the law has asked before. It would seem, certainly, that things will get better now, given these new standards, and they probably will.
However.
What happens when the districts fail to do what this new law asks? What happens when Sally, tormented daily because she wears hand-me-downs or is socially awkward, finally, in despair, suffers mental breakdown or worse, ends her life, as we know some victims do? What if the school district ignored this new law and the 'standards' it imposes? What can Sally's family do?
From what I can see, nothing they couldn't do before the law was passed, and that's not much, because this new law creates no private enforcement mechanism - law suits - to make the lesson of failure count.
Do you think the district as a paper entity cares when none of its people will be held personally responsible? Do you think it's insurance carrier cares?
Tell your legislator that the law has to be given teeth. Until it is, it won't be as effective as it might otherwise be. Some lives will be saved, some suffering prevented, but as a state, as a society, we should want better for our kids.
JOURNEY TO JUSTICE
DISCLAIMER: This web log is not legal advice, nor should it be construed to be legal advice or the offering of legal advice. It should not be read as guaranteeing or suggesting any particular outcome in any Court will occur in any particular case. It is not, and should be read as, a complete or authoritative analysis of the state of law, which is constantly subject to change.
"Journey to Justice" - The Web Log of Civil Rights Trial Lawyer Kevin M. Costello, Esq. (www.costellomains.com).











