School-Based Bullying and Teen Dating Violence Prevention Laws: Overlapping or Distinct?

Abstract

The most recent legislative attempts to curb violence in schools have been school-based dating violence prevention laws. In the previous decade, there was an increase in legislation designed to prevent bullying in schools; these laws now exist in 50 states. However, most anti-bullying laws provide an expansive definition of bullying that includes any type of peer aggression, harassment, or teen dating violence (TDV). Having several different state and federal laws aimed at curtailing multiple forms of aggression may produce confusion about appropriate intervention and disciplinary responses, requiring school districts to develop parallel sets of policies, educational curricula, intervention approaches, and reporting requirements for overlapping behaviors that can be simultaneously peer aggression, bullying, harassment, and TDV. We conducted a systematic search of applicable laws and systematically coded those we identified for relevant content (i.e., definitions, covered locales, protected groups, and personnel, procedural, preventive, and disclosure elements). Anti-bullying laws were typically more detailed than dating violence laws. TDV laws were more likely to target TDV and control intimate behavior and to provide for education about healthy relationships. Both types of laws often mandated trainings; specified reportable behaviors; discussed sanctions, recommendations, and interventions; and mentioned counseling, specially trained staff persons, or designated specialists. Both anti-bullying and TDV laws also sometimes directed reporting of aggregate incident rates and impacts of prevention efforts. Neither type of law tended to specify school and community resources or prevention approaches. Results inform discussion of the merits of different approaches to school-based violence prevention laws.

The emergence of the language of desire toward nonviolent relationships during the dialogic literary gatherings

“…This interventional work, where students engage in a collective interpretation of a classic literary text previously read, is especially relevant in such contexts where students might have fewer rich interactions that equip them with the skills and tools to reflect critically on their preferences and relationships. Indeed, it is especially significant to analyze this intervention in early adolescence, since this developmental stage is particularly important for their identity formation (Løhre 2020) and they start to differentiate between acquaintance or friend and sexual, intimate or dating partner (Cascardi et al 2018). Thus, this study sets forth a pathway toward the exploration of DLG as an educational intervention that tackles dialogue as an opportunity in early adolescence to potentially convey transformative discourses that can challenge a coercive dominant discourse by engaging in critical reflections in which LoD may emerge toward nonviolent models and relationships.…”

Assessment of Variation in US State Laws Addressing the Prevention of and Response to Teen Dating Violence in Secondary Schools

“…A clear definition and enumeration of specific behaviors sets the foundation for subsequent laws, especially given the overlap in definitions, behaviors, and outcomes of TDV, bullying, and sexual harassment. 17 The lack of a clear definition can make it challenging for school staff to determine when to respond and to know when other policies may be involved (eg, Title IX). In setting the scope, laws did not explicitly acknowledge the increased risk for experiencing TDV among youths from marginalized groups.…”

“…23 Although TDV has specific characteristics, antibullying policies can serve as a useful starting point; in addition, school districts could address bullying and TDV in an integrated policy, given the overlap between these behaviors. 17 , 30 Among states that included TDV policies in their laws, almost a third did not require anyone to be trained on or informed of the policy. For written policies to be implemented, dissemination to staff, students, and parents is critical and can be achieved both through educational sessions and through inclusion in standards of conduct, school handbooks, and school rules.…”

Trends in Secondary School Practices Related to Violence Prevention, 2012‐2018

“…10,11 Moreover, in the past 2 decades, states have adopted laws requiring or encouraging school districts to have policies for preventing bullying, sexual harassment, and dating violence. [12][13][14] However, there is little information about the degree to which schools have implemented these policies and practices across states or how implementation has changed over time. [15][16][17] In the current study, we examined trends from 2012 to 2018 in the percentage of secondary schools across 33 US states that engaged in practices related to violence prevention (including bullying, fighting, dating violence).…”

“…The ability of teachers and school staff to effectively implement primary prevention programs (eg, educating students about how to build respectful relationships) is increasingly recognized as an important component of youth violence prevention 10,11 . Moreover, in the past 2 decades, states have adopted laws requiring or encouraging school districts to have policies for preventing bullying, sexual harassment, and dating violence 12‐14 . However, there is little information about the degree to which schools have implemented these policies and practices across states or how implementation has changed over time 15‐17 …”