Anti-Bullying Law in Michigan *Wink**Wink*

This semester, I have been taking Education Law at Wayne Law. I had never really considered much about education law before this class, but I recognized my lack of knowledge of how our education system works and wanted to find out what the law behind it is. This class has been fantastic and has opened my eyes to the complexities that surround the fundamental element of educating our children and ourselves. It has also showed me that, currently, Michigan is far behind in recognizing the rights of students throughout their education.

Recently, we talked about bullying and acts of hate, related to the schools ability to step in and stop it.  I have seen the video from Jamey Rodemeyer, the student who recently contributed his voice to the “It Gets Better” campaign, then was found by his sister because the bullying he was subjected to was too much to handle.  We have read cases about how bullying gets worse and worse as technology changes, and how most states have taken active steps toward developing Anti-Bullying legislation and programs to stop bullying and help the victims.  I learned Michigan is one of the few states who had no state-wide legislation.  Without such legislation, the students have a much harder time recognizing a right and a recourse against the actions of the bullies and even perhaps a school system that might encourage it.

Then, I saw the articles about the “Anti-Bullying” bill going through the state legislature this week. I say “anti-bullying” with the greatest amount of sarcasm, because the language in this bill actually provides a shelter for bullies if they make a statement of “a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction of a school employee, school volunteer, pupil, or a pupil’s parent or guardian.” This bill is actually creating a means through which people can legally and legitimately bully others.  It’s sickening.  I’m sure it will be subject to legal challenge if passed.  It has already been through the ringer in regards to criticism for how it worked and what it says.  Did I mention the father of the child who this bill is named after, Matt Epling (the child), has loudly spoken out against this bill for exactly the language quoted above?

The sponsor of the bill, Senator Rick Jones, a Republican from Grand Ledge has been reported to say that the bill won’t be used to bully under that context and is intended to require school districts to create their own anti-bullying policies.  It is true that the bill has very specific requirements of school districts regarding the type of policy they should have, reporting methods, etc.  But the language I quoted above supersedes those policies.  It is written into the law.  What could possibly be the purpose for such language when it is obvious that people use their “religious” beliefs all the time to bully and harass people from all walks of life, with particular focus on the gay community.  But what else could it mean?  Can a Christian child tell a Muslim child he is a terrorist and deserves to die because he has a strongly held “moral” conviction that this is the truth of Islam?  Will we protect that hate then?

What if the tables are turned.  Will the sponsor of this bill stand idly by and protect the bully if an atheist child tells a Christian child that God doesn’t exist and anyone who believes that is an ignorant person who will go nowhere when they die? What if every day that atheist child stuffs pamphlets disavowing the presence of God in a Christian student’s locker because he is trying to “convert” the other?  Will then the sponsor of this bill claim discrimination based on religion and say the speech has gone too far?

We all know far worse things are said by bullies and far more serious consequences occur because of it.  Children are dying because they are living in a torturous world with only one way they can see out.  We cannot afford to provide shelters for bullies to hide under.  This language in the bill is an effective “wink and nod” at a bully, admonishing him/her to not to be a bully while at the same time spelling out exactly how to get around it.

Instead, we need to identify both the bully and the victim, and those who have the potential to become either. Or both. We need to stop what’s happening now and provide reasonable and constructive steps that everyone can take toward working together.  The beginning of this bill is a step in the right direction.  The language I have quoted here must be removed, or any potential good this bill could create will be useless before it even begins.

I just checked the state legislature site about the bill and it appears to be in committee with the state House.  I don’t know when the vote will be, but it’s critical to contact your House representative and tell them to vote NO, until this bill can actually protect victims and not bullies.

What are your thoughts?  I know usually I am much more “here are the arguments, now my editorial,” but this one hit me pretty hard. I’m interested to know your thoughts.  Is it not all doom and gloom as I say, if the bill does get passed and signed to law?  What do you think will happen?

For some other articles about the bill, click the links below:

Read the actual bill SB 137

Dearborn Patch Article with Interesting Comments

Detroit Free Press Article with the State Education Director’s Criticism

Everyone is talking about it!

Advertisement