Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T15:05:40.787Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter Four - Keeping Kids Out of Court: Jokes, Defamation, and Duty to Protect

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2014

Shaheen Shariff
Affiliation:
McGill University, Montréal
Get access

Summary

Contradictions in private law respect adolescents’ worthiness as decision-makers under some rules; and override their dignity, agency and autonomy through articulation of other rules or doctrines.

(Van Praagh, 2005)

Introduction and Framework for Discussion

In Chapter 3, I discussed how and why existing child pornography laws and emerging statutes that criminalize children and require harsher punishment are inappropriate for dealing with sexting and cyberbullying behaviors. My analysis was based on the data and scholarship presented in Chapter 2 to argue that criminal law is perhaps too rigid and reactive a response to apply to Digitally Empowered Kids (DE Kids). This is because, as the DTL Research data show, this generation of kids does not always have the required mens rea or criminal intent to harm others to the point of driving them to suicide.

I concluded Chapter 3 with reference to the perspectives of legal scholars on the role of law in addressing these issues. In particular, I mentioned the work of Van Praagh (2005) where she argues that contradictions in private law respect adolescents’ worthiness as decision makers under some rules; and override their dignity, agency, and autonomy through articulation of other rules or doctrines (Van Praagh, 2005). This piqued my interest in knowing more about how the courts decide on children’s culpability and accountability under tort law, human rights, and constitutional provisions designed to protect citizens and ensure due process. Basically, I wanted to learn the extent to which North American society is obligated to protect children from online forms of abuse. Numerous questions arose in my mind. These questions generally inform the discussion and analysis in this chapter, namely:

  1. Which laws or legal frameworks protect children’s vulnerability and which ones address their worthiness as decision makers?

  2. In what ways might laws or their judicial application override children’s dignity, agency, and autonomy?

  3. What role does discretionary power play in the application of the law and on due process?

  4. What are the roles and responsibilities of adults to oversee and regulate online communication among students, even when it occurs outside the physical school context, online and outside of school hours?

  5. What types of laws have generally been implemented since I wrote Confronting Cyberbullying (Shariff, 2009) to address the responsibility of school and parents?

Type
Chapter
Information
Sexting and Cyberbullying
Defining the Line for Digitally Empowered Kids
, pp. 103 - 140
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

ACLU. (2012). AB 9: Seth’s Law—New Tools to Prevent Bullying in California Schools. Retrieved from .
Altobelli, T. (2010). Cyber-Abuse–A New Worldwide Threat to Children’s Rights. Family Court Review, 48(3), 459–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Areheart, B.A. (2007). Regulating Cyberbullies through Notice-Based Liability. Yale Law Journal, 117(41) 41–47.Google Scholar
Arsenio, W. F. & Lemerise, E. A. (2004). Aggression and moral development: Integrating social information processing and moral domain models. Child development, 75(4), 987–1002.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beran, T., Stanton, L., Hetherington, R., Mishna, F. & Shariff, S. (2012). Development of the Bullying and Health Experiences Scale Interact. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 1(2), e13. .CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calo, M. (2011). The Boundaries of Privacy Harm. Indiana Law Journal, 86(3), 1131–1162.Google Scholar
CBC News. (2013, July 4). Babies: Born to be Good? CBC News Player. Retrieved from .
CBC News. (2012, October 19). 8 Ontario girls arrested in high school bullying case. CBC News. Retrieved from .
CCRC. (2013). 10 Steps for Children in Canada—A Call to Action. Retrieved from .
Chu, J. (2005). You Wanna Take This Online? Cyberspace is the 21st century bully’s playground where girls play rougher than boys. Time, 6(6), 52.Google Scholar
Comacchio, C., Golden, J. & Weisz, G. (Eds.) (2008). Healing the World’s Children: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Child Health in the Twentieth Century. Montreal: McGill-Queens University Press.Google Scholar
Committee on the Rights of the Child. (2012, October 5). Consideration of reports submitted by States parties under article 44 of the Convention—Concluding Observations: Canada. Retrieved from .
Culbert, L. & Hagar, M. (2014, April 23). Dutch man charged in Amanda Todd online blackmail case. The Gazette. Retrieved from .
Danay, R. (2010). The Medium is Not the Message: Reconciling Reputation and Free Expression in Cases of Internet Defamation. McGill Law Journal, 56(1), 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eltis, K. (2011). The Judicial System in the Digital Age: Revisiting the Relationship between Privacy and Accessibility in the Cyber Context. McGill Law Journal, 56(2), 289–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farmer, T. W., Petrin, R., Brooks, D. S., Hamm, J. V., Lambert, K. & Gravelle, M. (2010). Bullying Involvement and the School Adjustment of Rural Students With and Without Disabilities. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 20, 19–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, M. S. (2001). Suicide and the media. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 932(1), 200–224.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gunn, J.T. (2006). The Religious Right and the Opposition to U.S. Ratification of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Emory International Law Review, 111, 119–127.Google Scholar
Henderson, A. (2009). High-tech words do hurt: A modern makeover expands Missouri’s harassment to include electronic communications. (Masters thesis, University of Missouri). Retrieved from .
Hinduja, S. & Patchin, J. W. (2010). Bullying, cyberbullying, and suicide. Archives of Suicide Research, 14(3), 206–221.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hinduja, S. & Patchin, J. W. (2014, April). A Brief Review of State Cyberbullying Laws and Policies. Cyberbullying Research Center. Retrieved from .
Howe, R.B. & Covell, K. (2001). The Challenge of Children’s Rights for Canada. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.Google Scholar
Howe, R.B. & Covell, K. (2007). A Question of Commitment: Children’s Rights in Canada. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.Google Scholar
Juvonen, J. & Gross, E. F. (2008). Extending the school grounds?–Bullying experiences in cyberspace. Journal of School Health, 78(9), 496–505.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kofoed, J. & Sondergaard, D. M. (2009). Mobning: Sociale Processer Pa Afveje [Bullying: Social Processes Gone Awry]. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag.Google Scholar
Lankshear, C., Knobel, M. & Peters, M. (Eds.). (2008). Digital literacies: Concepts, policies and practices (Vol. 30). New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Livingstone, S. & Brake, D. (2010). On the Rapid Rise of Social Networking Sites: New Findings and Policy Implications. Children and Society, 24(1), 75–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lokeinsky, K. (2012, February 24) Post at your own risk: Teens need to be more concerned about Internet privacy. The Lariat. Retrieved from .
Lucock, C. & Yeo, M. (2006), Naming Names: The Pseudonym in the Name of the Law. Ottawa Law and Technology Journal, 3(1), 53–108.Google Scholar
MacKay, A.W. (2012). Respectful and Responsible Relationships: There’s No App for That (Halifax, NS: Nova Scotia Task Force on Bullying and Cyberbullying). Retrieved from .Google Scholar
McGuire, P. (2012, October 15). Amanda Todd’s alleged tormentor named by hacker group. CBC News. Retrieved from .
McLachlin, B. (2003). Courts, Transparency and Public Confidence: To the Better Administration of Justice. Deakin Law Review, 8(1), 1–11.Google Scholar
Nies, Y., Donaldson, J. & Netter, S. (2010, January 28). Mean Girls: Cyberbullying Blamed for Teen Suicides. ABC News. Retrieved from .
Palfrey, J. (2009). Hearing on Cyberbullying and other Online Safety Issues for Children (United States House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, Subcomittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security). Retrieved from .
Parker, I. (2012, February 6). The Story of a Suicide. The New Yorker. Retrieved from .
Prout, A. (2005). Towards the Interdisciplinary Study of Children. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
Reid, T. (2012, October 20). The National. Retrieved from .
Seidman, K. (2012, September 19). McGill law students in project that aims to curb cyberbullying. The Gazette. Retrieved from .
Senoo, Y. (2007). Netto-ijime (cyber bullying): Bullying moves to cyberspace. Unpublished term paper for EDEM 609 Issues in Education Masters course, Prof. Shaheen Shariff, Department of Integrated Studies, Faculty of Education, McGill University.
Shariff, S. (In Progress). Defining the Lines on Cyberbullying Among University Students. In Helen Cowie & Carrie-Anne Myers (Eds.), Bullying Amongst University Students. (Prospectus submitted to Routledge (Taylor & Frances): UK).
Shariff, S. (Under Review). Defining the Lines on E-Girls and Intimate Images. In Jane Bailey & Valerie Steeves (Eds.), E-Girls and E-Citizens. (Publisher to be determined).
Shariff, S. (2008). Cyberbullying: Issues and Solutions for the School, the Classroom, and the Home. Ablington, Oxfordshire, UK: Routledge (Taylor & Frances Group).Google Scholar
Shariff, S. (2009). Confronting Cyberbullying: What Schools Need to Know to Control Misconduct and Avoid Legal Consequences. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shariff, S. (2012, April 30). Policy Brief to Canadian Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights. Brief delivered at the Canadian Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights. Retrieved from .
Shariff, S. (2013). Courting Digital Citizenship: Keeping Schools Out of Court. In Hanewald, R. (Ed.), From Cyber Bullying to Cyber Safety: Issues and Approaches in Educational Contexts (pp.169–191). New South Wales: Nova Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Shariff, S. & Churchill, A. H. (2010). Truths and Myths of Cyber-bullying: International perspectives on stakeholder responsibility and children’s safety. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Shariff, S., Wiseman, A., & Crestohl, L. (2012). Defining the Lines between Children’s Vulnerability to Cyberbullying and the Open Court Principle: Implications of A.B. v. Bragg Communications, Inc. Education and Law Journal, 21(3), 231–262.Google Scholar
Shaw, G., Sinoski, K. & Quan, D. (17 October 2012). Online ‘lynch mob’ decried: Mother of man named by hacktivists pleads: ‘Let police investigate’. The Gazette, A10.
Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights. (2012). Cyberbullying Hurts: Respect for Rights in the Digital Age. Retrieved from .
Stoddart, J. (2012, November 9). Open Courts and Privacy Law in Canada. Remarks at the Supreme Court of British Columbia Education Seminar delivered at the Supreme Court of British Columbia. Retrieved from .
Suzuki, D. (2012, October 9). Babies: Born to be Good? The Nature of Things. Retrieved April 28, 2014, from .
UNICEF. (2008). UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre Report on Child Safety Online. Retrieved from .
Van Praagh, S. (2005). Adolescence, Autonomy and Harry Potter: The Child as Decision Maker. International Journal of Law in Context, 1(4), 335–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, S. & Mitchell, C. (2008). Imaging, keyboarding, and posting identities: Young people and new media technologies. In Buckingham, D. (Ed.), Youth, identity, and digital media (pp. 25–47). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Willard, N. (2010). Ensuring Student Cyber Safety. (Subcommittee on Healthy Families and Communities, Committee on Education and Labor). Retrieved from .
Ybarra, M. & Mitchell, K. (2004). Online Aggressor/Targets, Aggressors, and Targets: A Comparison of Associated Youth Characteristics. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45(7), 1308–1316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, H. (2011). But Names Won’t Necessarily Hurt Me: Considering the Effect of Disparaging Statements on Reputation. Queen’s Law Journal, 37(1), 1–38.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×